Hey /fit/, I'm still kind of a noob dyel but I am following

>>39379629
you won't build much strength on dumbbells
>source: my broscience

>>39379640
That's what I was thinking, DB press is more for aesthetics where the real bench press gives you the strength gains isn't it?

Welp I'm gonna stall on bench I guess, thanks shitty gym for only having one bench and thanks 3 retards for humping the bench for half an hour.

>>39379640
you can build strength with any movement that has sufficient range of motion and mechanical tension and hits the right muscles
>>39379687
heavy sets of 5 or less are most specific to strength, and doing sets like that is very difficult with dumbbells (at that point trying to stay balanced and get the DBs into position is harder than the actual set)

so yes for maximal strength BB bench is better, but that isn't to say that DB bench is only for looks

as long as you progressively overload in a reasonable rep range you will get stronger

>>39380336
You can build strength at any rep range.

Source: leeman

>>39380379
leeman is a bad example because he's geared out of his mind

he does a very extreme form of linear periodization where he goes from like 30 reps down to heavy triples and doubles over a few months

linear periodization this extreme over this long of a timescale doesn't work very well for natty lifters because you are detraining one capacity while training another (you start sucking shit at volume work while peaking, you start sucking shit at lifting heavy early on when you're doing 30 rep sets)

steroids somewhat fix this and let you retain all your adaptations better (also even with the low mechanical tension of a 30 rep set you'll still build muscle with steroids, this is not the case natty unless you're untrained)

good linear periodization for natties should stay in more sane rep ranges (maybe like 12-15 down to 1-3)