Man of Honour
Wow, not only did you agree with me, but you also swam at the same level I did!
I wasn't allowed to do weights either, though my school tried pushing me to, even though I'd been explictly told not to by my trainers.
what should I do to broaden my shoulders?
- Thread starter Zom
- Start date
Wow, not only did you agree with me, but you also swam at the same level I did!
I wasn't allowed to do weights either, though my school tried pushing me to, even though I'd been explictly told not to by my trainers.
Anyone can hurt themselves, that's life ffs.
Sorry though, that last sentence, i'm not sure what you mean by it, if there is something that can make me bigger and stronger faster/more effectively than weight training, PLEASE TELL ME!!!
Faster, unlikely - but stronger can be achieved by high intesity body resistance training and EMS-like efforts. I take rock climbers as a prime example. Their strength to mass ratio needs to be very high. This is achieved through maximising their muscle fibre recruitment. As I`m sure you are aware, this is achieved simply by knackering as many fibres as possible through a high volume of low weight contractions. EMS can bring the same sort of effects with decent kit and a bit of additional effort. Press-ups are suprisingly effective if you do enough of them (see Charlie Bronson guide
)But in my experience, the more "overdeveloped" muscle you have, the easier it is to cause yourself problems.
Last edited:
EMS haha nuff said.
BTW i didn't ask how to get faster, but how to get stronger, faster.
Maybe you should tell these Olympic Lifters, Powerlifters, and WSM entrants about this new revolutionary training, EMS and bodyweight exercises.
Yes i know you can get reasonably strong by doing BW exercises, but nowhere near what weights can do. And as for EMS... i'm not even going to go there.
Man of Honour
The difference is bodymass. Those powerlifters et al all have massive body mass. They need to.
But younsters with that not only look silly, but do damage to themselves...
I didn`t mean quicker either.
The measure of "strength" is obviously key here. Lifting 200 kilos is all very well, but if it takes a 200 kilo man to do it, then that is inefficient. In terms of training, you get to the stage quicker, but men of lower bodyweight but "better" (i.e. more recruitable fibres) muscles can match you. Working the muscles to this stage takes longer and so is usually neglected. To be fair, international athletes have generally genetically better muscles anyway, and so less need for this sort of training.
If you take strength as the "ability of the neuromuscular system to produce force", then it can be considered in terms of maximal ability and efficiency (i.e. taking into account the volume of muscle). Low (body) weight training can develop muscle that is pound-for-pound of greater ability to produce force than weight trained muscle.
Most EMS kit if naff, but the theory is good - just need to apply it correctly. What is your argument against it?
The measure of "strength" is obviously key here. Lifting 200 kilos is all very well, but if it takes a 200 kilo man to do it, then that is inefficient. In terms of training, you get to the stage quicker, but men of lower bodyweight but "better" (i.e. more recruitable fibres) muscles can match you. Working the muscles to this stage takes longer and so is usually neglected. To be fair, international athletes have generally genetically better muscles anyway, and so less need for this sort of training.
If you take strength as the "ability of the neuromuscular system to produce force", then it can be considered in terms of maximal ability and efficiency (i.e. taking into account the volume of muscle). Low (body) weight training can develop muscle that is pound-for-pound of greater ability to produce force than weight trained muscle.
Most EMS kit if naff, but the theory is good - just need to apply it correctly. What is your argument against it?
Last edited:
I'm not arguing about that any more, although i still think that done correctly, it's fine to start weight training at 16.
It's the
statement, and the following arguments that EMS and body weight exercises can make you stronger.
Because it can.
Bodyweight is equivalent to light weight - so lets be specific here when we are talking about heavy weights. This sort of training improves volume and power output of existing fibres, but cannot be continued beyond the point at which "heavy" fibres are fatigued. There exist lower strength/less developed fibres in the muscle that cannot meet the demands of the heavy lift, and hence are simply not used in heavy weight traing. To develop them requires low weight/high rep work that improves their recruitment (innervation/receptiveness to stimuli). These muscle fibres may be trained up to take heavier weights (an ideal traing regime is a mix of heavy+light), but they could not be worked by heavy lifting alone. Through pure bodyweight training, near maximal recruitment can be achieved, and this is usually more effective in producing strength than hypertrophy of a limited number of fibres.
.Bodyweight is equivalent to light weight - so lets be specific here when we are talking about heavy weights. This sort of training improves volume and power output of existing fibres, but cannot be continued beyond the point at which "heavy" fibres are fatigued. There exist lower strength/less developed fibres in the muscle that cannot meet the demands of the heavy lift, and hence are simply not used in heavy weight traing. To develop them requires low weight/high rep work that improves their recruitment (innervation/receptiveness to stimuli). These muscle fibres may be trained up to take heavier weights (an ideal traing regime is a mix of heavy+light), but they could not be worked by heavy lifting alone. Through pure bodyweight training, near maximal recruitment can be achieved, and this is usually more effective in producing strength than hypertrophy of a limited number of fibres.
Urrr since when was lifting weights simply lifting the heaviest possible weights?? Take my routine for example, i have a heavy day when i'm squatting over 160kg and a speed day, when i do explosive reps with only 80-100kg. Think you seem to have a limited view of weight training mate.
Originally posted by sedm1000
Can only work with the information posted
If the thread starter does the usual "get big" reading, then he is liable to get the same idea. How many "explosive" reps are you doing (out of interest)?
Well if you're gonna diss it, you should at least research it first
I follow a routine called "westside barbell training" and on dynamic (speed) day i do 10 sets of 2 reps of explosive squats (plus other things after of course) They've boosted my squat no end.
EDIT: Also it's not my fault that the internet contains loads of crap training ideas.
I know you cant be blamed for the junk on the internet, but nobody had pointed it out to this guy yet (and being a newbie he needs good guidance).
I`m not sure the dynamic effort method is working in quite the same way as I describe (might actually be working peak output of fibres, i.e. getting the ones you have working in better sync) - the repitition method is closer to what I am talking about, and maybe not quite so good if you are squatting! The goal state is not quite falling over and dying, but general lack of coordination after failure should be about right.
Originally posted by sedm1000
I`m not sure the dynamic effort method is working in quite the same way as I describe (might actually be working peak output of fibres, i.e. getting the ones you have working in better sync) - the repitition method is closer to what I am talking about, and maybe not quite so good if you are squatting! The goal state is not quite falling over and dying, but general lack of coordination after failure should be about right.
I never said it was "the same" just pointing out that weight training isn't just doing your max for a couple of reps and then finishing.
I still will never agree that bodyweight only exercises will build more strength than a proper weights regeime, and i'm pretty sure most of the strongest men (and women) in the world will agree.
But I can't imagine a rock climber picking up them bolders, etc in the worlds strongest man.
Rock climbing requires a lot of skill and technique its not just strength. I know because I'm a member of the Cardiff rock climbing club and I'm not strong but I do ok.
Rock climbing requires a lot of skill and technique its not just strength. I know because I'm a member of the Cardiff rock climbing club and I'm not strong but I do ok.
Last edited:
Originally posted by noob
But I can't imagine a rock climber picking up them bolders, etc in the worlds strongest man.
Rock climbing requires a lot of skill and technique its not just strength. I know because I'm a member of the Cardiff rock climbing club and I'm not strong but I do ok.
Yes, it all depends on how you measure strength. An ant cannot lift a 2 kilo rock, but it can carry 10-50x its own bodyweight. I think muscle mass must be taken into account when assesing muscle strength.