Research: At least one third won't make meaningful muscle gains

[Valhallian]

Originally Posted by hakkarin

Many of the fitness youtubers that have millions of subscribers often say things that make no sense or even use horrible form (there are even a couple of dudes why say using bad form is actually good), and yet they have amazing bodies and people actually listen to them. Granted many of them (well, almost all of them) abuse drugs.

Hakkarin, please just stop. You're embarrassing yourself at this point. Most advanced lifters in the online space in general, not just fitness Youtubers, advocate cheat reps and imperfect form for particular exercises. They have their place. The "perfect form" mantra is meant for those of us just starting out, the beginners and early intermediates, so you can groove the movement pattern down and perform the lift safely. You want it to become second nature to you, if possible. When you get more advanced, it matters less.

Your problem is you keep talking in absolutes like you know everything there is to know about lifting. There are no bright line rules about anything, even "you must always use perfect form!"

[hakkarin]

Originally Posted by hooligan

Exactly. This is a picture of a friend of mine. He works full-time for Microsoft, he is a hobbyist bodybuilder. I can 100% guarantee you he doesn't use steroids. He'd be laughed off a pro bodybuilding stage, but is still damn impressive. He is not some genetic freak, he's just a normal guy that trained hard and was dedicated/committed to his goal.

Wow, what a great way to shatter your credibility. The fact you are not only claiming this guy is natty but then on top of that claim he isn't even genetically gifted has convinced me even more than before that you are pinning. If you yourself have been training for as long as you claim and you say this guy is perfectly natty then it's a dead give away that you are on roids. This is something I have seen before; guys on roids attacking everyone who highlights the unrealistic standards promoted or the importance of genetics, because they themselves juice and are extremely defensive about it. There is no way in hell you are natty if you are claiming with a legit straight face that the guy in the picture you posted is drug free. It's a dead give away.

Originally Posted by JK508

Hakkarin, please just stop. You're embarrassing yourself at this point. Most "advanced" lifters...

Are genetically talented and on roids, and thus often have no idea what they are talking about because their drugs allow them to get away with mediocre form (until they get injured) and programming. This includes most youtube fitness channels.

Originally Posted by JK508

The "perfect form" mantra is meant for those of us just starting out, the beginners and early intermediates, so you can groove the movement pattern down and perform the lift safely. You want it to become second nature to you, if possible. When you get more advanced, it matters less.

Perhaps if you use imperfect reps every now and then as a form of accessory work while still doing most reps/sets with actual proper form, it's not that big of a deal. But I have seen many guys do mostly just imperfect form so they can isolate certain areas more and so they can use more weight. In the long term this is great way to create imbalances in your body which can lead to injury.

Originally Posted by JK508

Your problem is you keep talking in absolutes like you know everything there is to know about lifting. There are no bright line rules about anything, even "you must always use perfect form!"

Go perform a heavy deadlift with questionable form and tell me how this works for you. If you don't snap your **** today it will happen tomorrow or the day after that.

[Valhallian]

Originally Posted by hakkarin

Are genetically talented and on roids, and thus often have no idea what they are talking about because their drugs allow them to get away with mediocre form (until they get injured) and programming. This includes most youtube fitness channels.

And you know this how? You know for a fact that AlphaDestiny and Alan Thrall are on the juice? The mods and users on the powerlifting and weightroom subreddits are all juicing, the guys who have been lifting for years all MUST be juicing? Please explain how cheat reps mean you're juicing. You're talking out of your ass man.

Originally Posted by hakkarin

Perhaps if you use imperfect reps every now and then as a form of accessory work while still doing most reps/sets with actual proper form, it's not that big of a deal. But I have seen many guys do mostly just imperfect form so they can isolate certain areas more and so they can use more weight.

This is perfectly fine for select exercises. All the credible advanced lifters online will tell you this. They often use mixes of both strict rep work and cheat work.

Originally Posted by hakkarin

In the long term this is great way to create imbalances in your body which can lead to injury.

Go on, please explain.

Originally Posted by hakkarin

Go perform a heavy deadlift with questionable form and tell me how this works for you. If you don't snap your **** today it will happen tomorrow or the day after that.

It's official, you don't know what you're talking about. Not only that you repeatedly set up straw men to argue with, it's very frustrating. No one has ever advocated "cheat reps" for any of the main compounds lifts.

[Malloric]

Originally Posted by Frogburn

A look into what goes into building and sustaining Anthony Pettis as a professional athlete. There is no reliance on "pure genetics" and then a retreat behind a TV screen while guzzling lots of soda and stuffing the face with bags of popcorn.

Anthony Pettis likely does not have the genetic type that responds well to muscle gains. He might, but likely does not. He doesn't do any serious strength training although. Hard to argue that his strategy is wrong. Lightweight is different than heavyweight. It's much faster, less brute strength. Having a genetic type that gets huge bicep gains for a lightweight UFC fighter is not that important. Also we're talking about how different people respond in one area. For most athletes, getting large muscles isn't really important at all. It's obviously not going to help, say, a cyclist. Even for a soccer or baseball player it isn't any real benefit. For a lineman, it is a benefit.

I mean, look at the number of homeruns we're seeing today in baseball versus steroid era. They're not far off, despite the larger strike zone and higher velocity pitchers today than during the steroid era. Big biceps doesn't have much correlation with home runs, and most of the small amount of correlation there is is more likely attributable to the smaller strike zone and slower pitchers rather than bigger biceps of the steroid era hitter. For power hitters, it's hard to argue that it doesn't help. Steroids took Bonds from being a great player to a best of the generation player. Big biceps do matter for power hitters, but someone who can't hit won't be able to hit just because they have big biceps.

I think if you look at NFL players, even college football players, you will see something similar. More than one specialist paid to bring an athelete up to optimal condition in a specific area. Kind of like a single Navy SEAL and all the money the government pumps into that one individual via a slew of different specialist trainers and training camps. I think the annual budget of the small Navy SEAL organization exceeds that of that whole, huge organization of the United States Marine Corps.

You can have the best genetics on earth. But without the proper guidance, the commitment, the discipline, and increasingly today the sufficient financial backing... your genes won't get you far. A person less genetically gifted can surpass you with all the right dominoes in place.

[/quote]

Of course. That doesn't mean, especially at the NFL level, that ever single one of them is very gifted genetically. They all are. At that level, genetics is not enough. Someone with great genetics for growing muscles who eats poorly and doesn't train well will not see the gains of someone with the same genetics who does eat well and train well. Genetics doesn't mean you can just walk up and bench press 300 pounds when the heaviest thing you lift is a 20 oz bottle of soda. No one is saying that.

[Frogburn]

Originally Posted by hakkarin

Failing at what? I lift to get more fit and because it's a lifestyle that I enjoy. I am getting more fit, and I am enjoying this. So how am I failing? Do I fail because I don't obtain the unrealistic amount of muscle that people seem to think most naturals can obtain? I take it that you have either not been lifting for long enough to become disillusioned with the unrealistic expectations, are on roids, or are one of those people who got fat but trick themselves into thinking all the weight is muscle gain.

But go ahead and just throw away legit research that plainly shows how genetically different we are and how massively varied peoples response to lifting is because it defies the conventional feel good lies of the fitness industry.

Back when I was a child medical research concluded in some study--which local news carried a story on--that steroids did not assist in muscle growth for bodybuilders but rather it was all in the mind of the bodybuilders.

[Frogburn]

Originally Posted by hakkarin

Even people with good genetics need to go and actually lift, this is true. My original point wasn't that the genetically talented don't need to work, it was that people are rewarded extremely unequally for said work depending on their genetics. A guy with mediocre genetics can train super well for years and still be outclassed by a genetic freak who just does 2 half-assed workouts a week.

Okay, hakkarin, I should admit up and front that I have a bias against the proposition of genetic determinism.

The book Talent is Overrated made a significant impact on me but even before reading that book I was against the proposition of genetic determinism.

I'm not a runner although I do run (not lately). I never made a sport out of running nor have I ever ran in a marathon as those that are runners have, typically. But I've known one or two white runners that have ascribed the success of the Kenyans in running to mere genetics. But I don't believe that. After the Africans (mainly Kenyans and Ethiopians I believe) the Japanese do next best per capita. But interestingly enough they all have a very serious running culture. Japanese corporations actually house and provide salaries to Japanese runners that make short careers out of running annually in Japanese running competitions.

Is it only genetics or are there other environmental factors too (e.g., nutritional intake, social support, access to number of great trainers et cetera)?

In the book Talent is Overrated time was or is a critical component. The amount of hours a person has put into a field or specialty. The kind of training (not merely "hard" training) matters too. And guidance by a competent coach/trainer/mentor was found to be particularly critical. This went for champion ice skaters, great musicians, great mathematicians, golf players, businessmen or whatever.

I'm convinced "genetics" is a small portion to human, individual, capability to self improvement.

That's aside from the fact there is discussion to redefine "genes" given genes code for proteins and science once thought there was one gene for every one protein. Then they discovered that while there are roughly 100,000 proteins in the human body there are only roughly 20,000 genes in the human body, and only a fraction of those 20,000 code for anything we regard as significant. In other words, according to the math, one gene codes for more than one protein. And it's believed genes can change overtime in an individual for what they code for in an individual.

[Frogburn]

Here is that book, or rather the author of the book briefly interviewed by Charlie Rose. The book itself draws upon scientific research.


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zQoM7_CKsZo

The downside of the conclusions of the book is that due to time (I think it's averaged at 10,000 hours in any specific thing will develop you into an expert on or in that specific thing) after you pass a certain age it is unlikely you can ever become world class. You can still import everything but you will never be a world class champ.

Increasingly world champs begin in their grade school years. Tiger Woods or Oscar Dela Hoya. Whereas you starting off at age 40 or 50 are unlikely to ever obtain their level of excellence in their prime. They had already exceeded you in hours of training years earlier.

That does not discount any genetic contribution or edge but it is very minor compared to those other components.






Edit to add:

I want to point out and emphasize that I don't want to come off like I'm very knowledgeable or very experienced in the weight lifting world (or sports world in general). I have some novice time put in various areas but that's it. And I have not done a lot of research on anything.

My main purpose--or message--in this thread is that it is an injustice to subtract entirely from the hours, efforts, and commitment people have made in a given area when they have achieved something. Secondly, it is a disservice to yourself if you become convinced that any improvement whatsoever is impossible for yourself because genes determine nearly everything (about your potential).