OD's training log

MoNkeE · 19 Apr 2013 at 14:02

opethdisciple · 19 Apr 2013 at 15:08

I'll see what I can do regarding squats.

On the topic of split squats vs step ups.

Is either good, or is there defo one I should do over the other?

I was thinking of doing some kind of step up like this.

icecold · 19 Apr 2013 at 17:45

opethdisciple said:
I'll see what I can do regarding squats.

There really aren't many steps involved in getting a video

mrthingyx · 19 Apr 2013 at 20:37

icecold said:
There really aren't many steps involved in getting a video

To be fair, doing it with a video camera is an almighty pain in the posterior (find file, extract to PC, reformat, spend hours uploading).

So I just use a phone and upload straight to Youtube. :cool:

BigPecsPeter · 23 Apr 2013 at 11:33

If OP's aim is simply hypertrophy, he can do it without squatting. If he might be able to squat but is just reluctant, then yeah, that's a dumb attitude, but it's not going to prevent him building up his quads. Nobody has to squat. Pity to leave it out (or to have to leave it out), but it's not going to render progress impossible. Well, except for progress in the squat, duh...

More concerning is the lack of enough direct shoulder work in the upper body routine. Unless you wanna keep your delts a bit smaller, in which case it's fine.

icecold · 23 Apr 2013 at 13:11

How about being able to perform basic human movement pain free?

That's a goal I'd happily assume everyone wants, even if they don't understand it.

LiE · 23 Apr 2013 at 13:21

BigPecsPeter said:
If OP's aim is simply hypertrophy, he can do it without squatting. If he might be able to squat but is just reluctant, then yeah, that's a dumb attitude, but it's not going to prevent him building up his quads. Nobody has to squat. Pity to leave it out (or to have to leave it out), but it's not going to render progress impossible. Well, except for progress in the squat, duh...

More concerning is the lack of enough direct shoulder work in the upper body routine. Unless you wanna keep your delts a bit smaller, in which case it's fine.

I would say not being able to squat is more concerning than direct shoulder work.

BigPecsPeter · 23 Apr 2013 at 13:43

LiE said:
I would say not being able to squat is more concerning than direct shoulder work.

Not saying you're necessarily wrong, but why exactly?

LiE · 23 Apr 2013 at 13:47

As icecold said, not being able to perform a basic human movement is concerning. Training shoulders directly is personal preference. I haven't done direct shoulder work at all this year.

BigPecsPeter · 23 Apr 2013 at 14:06

LiE said:
As icecold said, not being able to perform a basic human movement is concerning. Training shoulders directly is personal preference. I haven't done direct shoulder work at all this year.

These are all great points (all as in, including icecold's post).

However, my point here is that it is ESSENTIAL to take people's personal objectives into account. OP is clearly the sort that has no interest in "basic human movement" at all. All he wants is some big-tookus muscles. If he could push an insane amount on the leg press, I'd wager he'd attain some pretty good quad hypertrophy.

As for direct training of shoulders, a little bit more would be good for OP for exactly the same reasons as above: he's after the glory muscles. He wants people to look at his delts and say, "well I be damned, THAT's one big dude". So a few sets on a shoulder press machine a couple times a week might not be enough.

LiE · 23 Apr 2013 at 14:11

Squats will transform a lower body completely, that's why it's regarded as one of the best exercises. Leg press will only get you so far, I can do silly weights on a leg press but never really had amazing quads.

BigPecsPeter · 23 Apr 2013 at 14:17

LiE said:
Squats will transform a lower body completely, that's why it's regarded as one of the best exercises. Leg press will only get you so far, I can do silly weights on a leg press but never really had amazing quads.

If we're talking MERELY hypertrophy and nothing else, the difference is not nearly so enormous as people might think or claim.

If we're talking hypertrophy AND everything else of benefit to a lifter, then of course the squat wins hands down.

For hypertrophy, the fact is it's fine. If you have a plate loaded machine and can load for example over a tonne with a full range of movement, you're GOING to have great quads, plain and simple, and no amount of argumentation can change that.

I should rephrase: you're going to have muscular quads; how well those muscles show will be a question of leanness.

MoNkeE · 23 Apr 2013 at 14:23

I would say squatting is still just an important when training 'merely' for hypertrophy, as you need to be hitting all the stabiliser muscles of your quad, and stretching all the fibers there. Leg press is only going to stimulate a certain area of your quad and make you look very bizarre.

LiE · 23 Apr 2013 at 14:24

BigPecsPeter said:
If we're talking MERELY hypertrophy and nothing else, the difference is not nearly so enormous as people might think or claim.

Based on what? There are far more muscles involved in a squat.

If we're talking hypertrophy AND everything else of benefit to a lifter, then of course the squat wins hands down.

Of course, squat isn't a machine isolation exercise.

For hypertrophy, the fact is it's fine. If you have a plate loaded machine and can load for example over a tonne with a full range of movement, you're GOING to have great quads, plain and simple, and no amount of argumentation can change that.

If you spend equal amount of effort on a squat you would have a better developed lower body and all the goodness that comes with squatting i.e. better core, improved movement, greater stability and control, etc.

BigPecsPeter · 23 Apr 2013 at 14:26

MoNkeE said:
I would say squatting is still just an important when training 'merely' for hypertrophy, as you need to be hitting all the stabiliser muscles of your quad, and stretching all the fibers there. Leg press is only going to stimulate a certain area of your quad and make you look very bizarre.

It is important. But not doing it is not going to = not building big quads.

You can emphasize various different things depending on how you press. The same is true of squats.

I think doing the leg press alone making anybody look "very bizarre" is a bit of a stretch.

icecold · 23 Apr 2013 at 14:28

MoNkeE said:
I would say squatting is still just an important when training 'merely' for hypertrophy, as you need to be hitting all the stabiliser muscles of your quad, and stretching all the fibers there. Leg press is only going to stimulate a certain area of your quad and make you look very bizarre.

^ this

Also, training on dysfunction can only make things worse.

Knees are pretty important to just moving around. I'd say it was fairly important to insist that a person understands this, and the best ways of facilitating "movement health", even when they don't seem very keen on grasping the concepts.

BigPecsPeter · 23 Apr 2013 at 14:30

LiE said:
Based on what? There are far more muscles involved in a squat.

Yep. I'm talking quad hypertrophy here, specifically. You wanna build up the quads? The difference between the exercises is not going to be ENORMOUS. The most important thing is progressive overload over time and the ability to keep making progress.

If you spend equal amount of effort on a squat you would have a better developed lower body and all the goodness that comes with squatting i.e. better core, improved movement, greater stability and control, etc.

Yes, I agree. Equally, if you spend all your time on the leg press, you will STILL be able to get big legs, provided you can keep adding weight over time. EDIT: ACTUALLY I DISAGREE; ONLY IF THAT EQUAL AMOUNT OF TIME INVOLVED MAKING A COMPARABLE AMOUNT OF PROGRESS; A CYCLE IN WHICH ONE MAKES LITTLE PROGRESS IN HIS SQUATTING WILL NOT BE BETTER THAN A CYCLE IN WHICH ONE MADE ENORMOUS PROGRESS IN THE LEG PRESS

Look, when all's said and done, what's the argument here? Squats are better than leg press? On the whole? Of course they are. Do you have to do them to get a well-developed lower body? No. You definitely do not. And such a claim makes absolutely 0 sense, physiologically or on any other measure.

LiE · 23 Apr 2013 at 14:34

You do realise that a squat is nothing like a leg press, despite what many people think.

If you spend all your time on the leg press you will imbalance your legs and create more problems.

BigPecsPeter · 23 Apr 2013 at 14:36

LiE said:
You do realise that a squat is nothing like a leg press, despite what many people think.

If you spend all your time on the leg press you will imbalance your legs and create more problems.

Definitely? You will, without a doubt, imbalance your legs?

That is way too much of a sweeping statement. Bad leg pressing might imbalance the legs. So could bad squatting.

Again, to reiterate, what are we arguing here? OP wants big legs. Does he HAVE TO SQUAT to get them? Answer: no.

LiE · 23 Apr 2013 at 14:39

BigPecsPeter said:
Definitely? You will, without a doubt, imbalance your legs?

That is way too much of a sweeping statement. Bad leg pressing might imbalance the legs. So could bad squatting.

Again, to reiterate, what are we arguing here? OP wants big legs. Does he HAVE TO SQUAT to get them? Answer: no.

We are trying to help the OP to be a better athlete and achieve his goals of size at the same time. Not gloss over the fact he has a dysfunction and prescribe machine isolation exercises.