What is the most important, redpilled thing you HAVE to know

>>41594756
>Also, height doesn't matter
t. Manlet

>>41594790
I'm 161cm and I was so fucking close to getting a girl about a month ago, height doesn't matter

>>41594806
t.Midget

This is a great idea for exchanging gym wisdom/broscience and everybody might learn a thing or two

Form > weight

Seriously, drop the weight and concentrate on form. Stretch at the bottom of the rep, squeeze at the top. It'll hurt like a muthafucka but you'll realise that you've been lifting wrong this whole time.

volume is king

do more -> get bigger and stronger

in regards to sets/reps/volume
>>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTO3k4n98ag

>>41594756

That one must, MUST, read the Starting Strength book.

>>41594756
eating

Steroids aren't bad m'kay

>>41595640
No frequency is king

Always follow a program. Whatever you come up with is probably fucking retarded.

>>41595640

This.
Volume (also known as time under tension) is what matters for growth.

The key factor here being that doing 12 reps in 20 seconds will NOT give you as good results as doing 12 reps with the same weight over 40 seconds.

This is the literal entire reason that 8-12 reps was ever suggested as the "mass building range" because it was based on a tempo that gave sets lasting for 40-50 seconds.

I think a lot of people assume that doing 12 reps vs 5 reps doesn't make too much difference in size gains is because people tend to spend as much time doing 5 reps as they do doing 12.

Slow your sets down and you will notice a lot better results from doing "training for mass"

File: 1490150892420.png (528KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

528KB, 1024x576px

>>41595842
this

Also, more volume is king because more volume = more practicing form = better execution = gainz

Form is the basis of everything.

Also, eating is easier than not eating. Yes, even as a skelly.
t. former skelly

PS
>pic related

Routines don't matter that much

deadlift is a meme. a fun meme, but a meme nevertheless

>>41595880
That's BS. If you artificially slow down your concentric phase you lower the amount of fast twitch fiber you recruit.

Doing reps slow is a meme. Paused reps are legit though.

Lifting is useless

>>41595977
fast twitch fiber comes from bodyweight stuff

>>41595977

You completely misunderstand what "fast" and "slow" twitch muscle fibers are.

>>41595977
This it's amazing how retarded people are. If you want more TUT just do more reps/sets at the same speed. Don't artificially slow your reps.

>>41595880
>I think a lot of people assume that doing 12 reps vs 5 reps doesn't make too much difference in size gains is because people tend to spend as much time doing 5 reps as they do doing 12.
You are neither experienced nor well informed

File: 1490427415200.jpg (64KB, 925x820px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 925x820px

In the end, it's the face that matters

>>41595987

>>41595997
>>41596001
What we train when we do heavy resistance training is our ability to move weight in a certain ROM as fast as possible.
That's is what fast twitch fiber is designed for.

Yes, reps don't actually have to be "fast" but you have to try to move it as fast as you can.
When you artificially restrict yourself and do the rep slow instead then you simply hit your muscle inefficiently when your goal is to build its size.

>>41596011

What do you mean?
A set of 5 reps can take 20 seconds, and doing 12 reps in that same time won't give the big difference in size gains that people think higher reps gives.

Are you trying to say thats wrong?

Eat vegetables.
Get enough sleep.
Enough ROM.
You're doing it wrong if it hurts whatsoever.
If your weight stagnates, start measuring your body dimensions. You're probably still losing fat.
Don't trust calculated TDEE too much. (Stagnated forever following a calculator's suggestion to the T, weight finally moved after going significantly lower than suggested. No strength loss)

File: c0c.jpg (72KB, 634x650px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 634x650px

>>41594806
>161cm
>I was so fucking close to getting a girl about a month ago
>close to getting

>>41596033

Slow reps still use fast twitch fibers.
>>41596033
>When you artificially restrict yourself and do the rep slow instead then you simply hit your muscle inefficiently when your goal is to build its size.

You are wrong. Volume is what matters. You could do 6 sets of 20 seconds and it be the same as 3 sets of 40 seconds. The effect would be basically the same. Doing the slower reps in this case is by definition more efficient. The goal in building size is volume, and volume comes from the time your muscles are under tension, not some arbitrary number of reps or sets.

>>41596060
>you still hit
Yeah, but less. It's less efficient, simple.

And no, you are completely wrong, sorry.

>>41596074

efficient
JˈfJʃ(ə)nt/
adjective
adjective: efficient

1.
(of a system or machine) achieving maximum productivity with minimum wasted effort or expense.

>spending more time for the same results is more efficient. OK.

btw I guarantee I look better and lift more than you.

File: KYsThKfJRzBpOwkfWKO1BXAYrI5XxRJZPlzy3n6HvTM.jpg (21KB, 320x180px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 320x180px

mindset and intensity is literally everything no matter what garbage program you are following

Im following Eric advice for a while now and strength gains are out of this world

>>41596044
>not experienced
How can you POSSIBLY believe that the average set of 5 takes as long as the average set of 12?
>not well informed
It's not just volume = time under tension, otherwise an isometric quarter squat for x sec would be equal to a normal set. Volume = reps x sets x weight

>>41594756
Steroids are a must if you want to look impressive and not train over 5 years for it (steroids still more impressive even then). But I know you're a nooblifter so train well for at least a year or even 2.

t. nattus

>>41596081
Stats?
240/160/260 here

Doesn't make you right btw.

>>41596092

I didn't say the AVERAGE set. I said that people blast out 12 reps as fast as possible which can take less than 20 seconds.
A set of 5 heavy squats can take longer than that, and if you disagree then you probably don't squat more than 3 plate. Same with deadlifts, bench and press to a lesser extent though thats just the nature of those exercises having less total intensity.

Time under tension, for the purposes of this arguments, is the same thing as volume. We aren't talking about isometrics or half reps, so stop shifting the goal posts.

>>41595855
frequency is not king, you will not progress long term by distributing the amount of volume you are doing currently over more workouts without actually increasing that volume

your total workload, number of sets, must increase for continued progress over your training career

frequency also matters of course but lifters have been successful with many training frequencies, you've got Sheiko with moderate frequency, Dietmar with very high frequency, and then you've got ed coan and other American PL programming like cube where you just smash one lift with retard volume but low frequency - the one common thread is that all elite lifters do a lot of volume

>>41596109
except high frequency allows you to do more volume weekly you imbecile

everyone knows you need to progress with weights no one stated otherwise

>>41596109
>what is neuromuscular efficiency?

File: 220kg(1).webm (2MB, 320x568px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x568px

>>41596094

for 5?
75kg OHP
170kg squat,
115kg bench,
220kg deadlift

at 85kg bw.

Vid is (kinda) proof. Though its only for 3.. I got 5 last week.

What do you do when you have an asymmetrical face? Nothing extreme...

>>41596130
No they are singles from last mock meet - I weigh a lot more than you though.

>>41596105
>I didn't say the AVERAGE set
>people tend to spend as much time doing 5 reps as they do doing 12
sry must have been a misunderstanding

>>41596146

Do you even do any size specific training?
Or is it all strength and strength assistance training?

>>41596171
I do BB for back basically every day - I have DB incline presses in all of my chest days, which was thought to build size.

>>41594756
Girls are either distractions or motivation, I picked motivation and I call her my oneitis.

>>41596121
right, so higher frequency allows you to get more volume, which is the main driver of adaptation in strength training as supported by every single study ever done on lifting weights and as understood by sports science for decades

you fucking imbecile

>>41596125
something that is improved with more working sets (volume) as well as frequency

>>41596402
You always have to adjust volume (again, wich is NOT time under tension) for progressive overload so it doesn't automatically mean high volume = high gains
Frequency as a variable why brosplits, ppl, 531, cube method fucking suck and can be increased to 12 times per week obviously not always going full retard every session and motivation plays a role aswell

>>41595897
Man that pic just reminds me of how much I masturbate out of boredom

>>41596512
there's no reason to train large bodyparts more than twice a week.

there are good reasons not to train them more than twice a week.

>>41596632
>You are smarter than olympic weightlifters who squat everyday

>the basic 3 day full body is only for novice and early intermediate

>light days are completely useless

>>41596683
none of those apply to what i said.

Be careful who you choose to compare yourself with.

>>41596632
>there's no reason to train large bodyparts more than twice a week.
Yes there is. Keeping/gaining neuromuscular efficiency and improving form a bit with light days

>there are good reasons not to train them more than twice a week.
Such as? Can't think of anything other than motivation

>>41594756
eating clean actually greatly benefits gains

>>41596739
This. Lift in normie gym and you don't have the motivation you'd have in a powerlifting gym or a gym mostly filled with professional bodybuilders

>>41596632
Any good bench program has 3 volume days a week

>>41596744
clearly the context implies training heavy, so a light day wouldn't affect it.

recovery of passive structures generally require a few rest days.
moving moderate to heavy weights more than twice a week can easily lead to injuries for normal people.

>>41596768
yeah, chest/triceps/front delts is just on the edge of benefits/injury prevention trade off.
if you can get away with benching 3 times a week without injury, it can be good.
difference in gains with twice a week is still minimal though.

File: main-qimg-513ddac3314cb35edf042fc728e850d1-c.jpg (8KB, 233x216px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 233x216px

>>41596835
>clearly the context implies
Kek just won my first internet argument. High five guys!

>>41596876
A U T I S M

>>41595265
>I read this in a bb.com email

>>41595880
t. Jeff Cavalier

File: 1492824672859.jpg (508KB, 2023x1500px) Image search: [Google]

508KB, 2023x1500px

>>41594756
>What is the most important, redpilled thing you HAVE to know about training?
Getting shredded by itself won't make you happy, get you a gf, etc. Don't use fitness as a way to avoid confronting your personal and mental problems.

>>41595987
Fuck

Lyle Mcdonald is insane but everything he says about nutrition is true

File: 1480942960494.jpg (58KB, 540x416px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 540x416px

>>41597180
Shit

>>41597637
Yeah he was shitposting on Nuckols page, insulting people. What's his problem?

>>41597686

Bipolar

Genuinely

File: 1494468979100.jpg (41KB, 400x474px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 400x474px

>>41594756
>height doesnt matter
ahahaHAHAHAHAHHAhaAHHaHAhAHAH

>>41597733
story? what kind of shit does he write?

File: vietnamfeels.jpg (381KB, 746x982px) Image search: [Google]

381KB, 746x982px

>>41597180
DELET THIS

Machines are useful

Volume, sets, reps and time under tension don't matter. Only HEIGHT, FACE and FRAME.

>>41595955
>never making it this bad

>>41594790
Height is definitive a factor in getting laid, but it's far from being nearly as important as people here make it out to be.

I am a 5'4 turbo manlet, I don't have a very attractive face and by /fit/ standarts I am also DYEL. I still had a few girlfriends and some one night stands. Some girls really do care and will not even give you the slightest chance if you're too small, but that really doesn't happen that often. Usually it's just one of many variables that can be blurred out by other stuff. The best metaphor I can think of is poker. Being small = having a slightly bad hand. It's a disadvantage for sure but you can still win if you play your cards right.

>>41595265
> Stretch at the bottom of the rep, squeeze at the top. It'll hurt like a muthafucka but you'll realise that you've been lifting wrong this whole time.

The amount of morons who still believe in this squeezing shit is scary. It's broscience to the nth degree.

Here's a little dose of common sense - if something hurts, it's not good. What do you go to the gym for? To get hurt? To feel a burn? Not me. I go to the gym for 2 reasons - to build strength and to build muscle.

That soreness you feel when you lift slowly and squeeze isn't the muscle being activated more. It's tissue inflammation. All it means is that you'll be sore for longer and take longer to recover.

In nature humans don't lift things slowly. They lift explosively with all the muscle fibres firing as a unit. THIS is the proper way to lift. Not your squeezing bullshit.

I recommend picking up a human anatomy book and not getting all your "info" from bodybuilding.com

>>41598228
ironically most of the science books lag behind a lot of the empirical knowledge gathered by lifters.

File: 1467187538306.jpg (29KB, 543x533px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 543x533px

>>41598228
>What do you go to the gym for? To get hurt? To feel a burn? Not me.

gains = hard work

also mindset is everything

>>41595265
>>41595265
hey, I've been running SL for 2 months, but i think my form was wrong on every lift except benchpress all this time, should I go back and reset the app to barbell only?

>>41595855
Only as it increases volume

pale = female

>>41599249
tanning = female

>>41599196
Read the discussion (I won >>41596876)

>>41596074
Defensive about being wrong, and yeah, you are wrong.

Do yourself a favor a Google eccentric lifting, there's actual science behind that part of the lift, beyond even the athlean x guy and the Boston guy. (Both of whom I would be much more likely to believe, compared to some autist on /fit/)

>>41595824
>squatting 5 plates for 6 doesn't mean shit
Oh kek rich

>>41599287
This amount of autism.. No, it's pretty clear to everyone that you did not win.

>>41594806
But you fell short, huh?

>>41598545
Post fedora memes all you want. It's fucking true. So many people get caught up in feeling a burn or pump. Pump =/= gains buddy.

>>41594806
I guess you weren't tall enough to reach her.

>>41598521
> Broscience spouted in the weight room is better than actual scientific studies
This may be one of the dumbest things I've read on here.

>>41600937
you'll realize this when you've spend a couple of years training and actually reading the books.

>>41595955
imagine choosing not to make it this hard

>>41597180
w-wait really

>>41597821
machines are great for isolation, and things like fly machines are good for form.
>he fell for the machine meme

>>41599908
Kekeroni