Reminder that heavy squats/deadlifts are not sustainable

Shit, thanks for the info man! Guess I gotta stop deadlifting 900lbs every workout now.

File: 1478731037210.jpg (572KB, 945x1477px) Image search: [Google]

572KB, 945x1477px

>>41986268

You're welcome

>>41986255
lifting light is for middle-aged moms in yoga pants who eat activia and have "wine night." i'm not saying you have to be the next dan green or kirill sarychev but put some weight on the bar you bitch-ass nigga.

>>41986255
>left is natty and right is roided

Wow, thanks for the fucking stupid image.

>>41986324

Both are roided

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnqggNm7g0Q

no shit nigga,pete rubish recently snapped his shit too

Small dick betas will feel insecure unless they risk physical harm every time they are trying to "better" themselves.

No one cares about your lifting total when you are in a nursing home having you ass wiped because you were a stupid manchild.

File: 1226934938435.jpg (79KB, 350x218px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 350x218px

>>41986324
>left is natty

There's heavy and then there's 'really fucking heavy'.

If you're using good form (a lot of heavy deadlifters aren't) and you're not trying to push WR on a regular basis this isn't likely to happen.
Dudes like this sacrifice optimal healthy form to pull extra pounds and now and then they get slapped for it.
Lilliebridge is world class and trains with ridiculous volume with ridiculous weights. It takes it's toll just like any other sport. Pushing that level of performance in any way for extended periods of time is going to increase your chances of getting injured.

Heavy deads are a great way to actually develop and maintain good spinae erector strength and posture. Good deadlifting form with challenging weight will keep your back in good health until you die.

>>41986443
>maintain good spinae erector strength

>Wow that guy has some nice spinae erectors

Said no girl ever

File: 1496874786072.gif (2MB, 460x259px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 460x259px

>>41986454
>lifting for women

>>41986454

The fuck does having a strong and supple lower back have to do with girls?

>>41986312
8-10 Reps isn't light. Why go under? Hypertrophy is achieved best around this rep range, your muscles get the biggest and most stimulation in this rep range. If you train lower you are training your CNS more then anything.

OP is right, it's not sustainable. So many lifters have bad tendons, fucked up backs, fucked up shoulders etc as young as their 30's due to this strength meme going around (it's mostly cross-fitters at this point though I will admit)

There is no reason whatsoever to focus on 1 rep maxes and 5 reps of heavy sets unless you are competing in actual powerlifting, in which case you know the risks of the sport.

If longevity and growth is your goal, do the 8-10 reps, focus on muscle mind connection, and your muscles are going to look bigger than the powerlifters anyway + you won't have the health problems.

Compounds are great, but powerlifting is a fucking meme.

>>41986502
>Falling for the 'hypertrophy rep range' meme

There is no magical rep range for anything. The only way to get stronger as a drug free lifter is to progressively overload and get stronger over time in your lifts.

>>41986502
6-8 > 8-10

Can someone explain to me what 'under tension' means in this case? I'm not calling bullshit, but literally every lifting exercise is 'under tension'.

>>41986547
Fuck I meant get bigger.

>>41986454
Cuz girls are crazy for the guy who went to snap city and lives in a wheelchair, right?

File: serge nubret.jpg (90KB, 736x1099px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 736x1099px

>>41986255
You really think those jacked ass niggas were "lifting light"?

>>41986502
>it's mostly cross-fitters at this point though I will admit
It's not though. It's the LE SCIENCE kids with NO MUSCLE who talk about MUH PROGRAM based upon SCIENTIFIC INTENSITY that are the cause of all this.

>>41986502

Nah.

>>41986540

Exactly.

You train for 5 reps for 'strength' and then lift less weight for 8 reps for 'size' when really you've just done the exact same amount of work.

You end up roughly the same. Doing high reps you still develop strength and doing low reps you still develop size because, after cns adaption, if you're lifting more weight your muscles are getting bigger.

>>41986554
Focusing on increasing time under tension. So you do the reps slowly and controlled. The general consensus is 1 second up, 3 seconds down for optimal tut

>>41986547
>>41986566
high reps are not only anecdotally more effective at building size (t. every bodybuilder and gymbro ever, pretty much), but it is now scientifically supported that high reps are more effective at building size

https://www.strongerbyscience.com/powerlifters-should-train-more-like-bodybuilders/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24714538

tl;dr on this study - you can either do 7x3 with a near 3RM load, which is absolutely crushingly difficult, or you can do 3x10 which is pretty easy (subjects wanted to do even more) - both resulted in the same amount of hypertrophy

also, it is pretty well understood that you can endure and survive more volume in lower intensity ranges (65%-75%) than higher ones, and volume is one of the key determinants of muscle growth (although not the only one)

so no, decades old bodybuilding conventional wisdom is not wrong, higher reps really are more efficient when it comes to hypertrophy

>>41986649
interesting, so you ignore explosive training and focus only on slow movements?

I'm not sure how much my ego can handle dropping the weights low enough to do that, but I'm sure the lack of sheering force on my spine might be worth it.

>>41986554
When you do an exercise the amount of time "the burn" is in that muscle is the time under tension. Typically people do reps quickly for the weight to go up, but you can go too quickly not fully engaging the muscle to its fullest extent. So a lot of weightlifters slow the tempo of their repetitions to above 2 seconds on the concentric motion and on the eccentric motion they typically manage 1 to 2 seconds. Look up the different types of hypertrophy for more info on this

>>41986713
Farmer Burns advises to do all reps as fast as possible.

>>41986687
>so you ignore explosive training
No, don't do this, unless your ONLY goal is hypertrophy, and even then I really wouldn't advise it.

>>41986770
is there a middle ground for individual reps, or does it need to be split at least into sets/exercises?

>Lilliebridges
>geared and equipped powerlifters
>not lifting like retards
terrible post

>>41986255

Still squat and deadlift heavy, 31 years old. My lower back is fine, but I did have to have a couple of surgeries. The miles and miles of ruck runs and humps didnt help. Neither did jumping out of air planes, running around shitty places with body armor on, or being a in a few HMMWV roll overs.

Dont know what this girl is whining about.

>>41986551
I think you need to check your math on that one anon

8 > 8?

>>41986551
>>41987220
shit you probably meant that it was better to do 6-8 whoops

>>41987186
yeah it's probably tough to maintain good form in those conditions. fortunately you're at the gym and you're an adult that doesn't need additional numbers to make people think his dick is bigger

>>41987273
I think his dick is bigger because of how he called that other guy a girl.

deadlift
squat

but do them carefully, light weight. very high reps

>>41987446
I agree, do this

if you're fucking gay lol

>>41986580
emm yes