The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness
Latest Article

The Five Biggest Contradictions in Fitness

Itís no secret that when people contradict themselves, it has the effect of making the flaws in their actions or statements seem glaringly obvious. But what about when WE ourselves get caught contradicting ourselves by someone else?

By: Nick Tumminello Added: January 6th, 2014
More Recent Articles
Contrast Training for Size
By: Lee Boyce
An Interview with Marianne Kane of Girls Gone Strong
By: Jordan Syatt
What Supplements Should I be Taking? By: Jay Wainwright
Bench Like a Girl By: Julia Ladewski
Some Thoughts on Building a Big Pull By: Christopher Mason

Facebook Join Facebook Group       Twitter Follow on Twitter       rss Subscribe via RSS
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 101 to 123 of 123
  1. #101
    Cardio bunny Alex.V's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Duke
    Posts
    49
    Originally posted by gopro
    Damn, so many PMs and emails asking me to help with their routines...I'm gonna be busy, lol.
    Funny you should say that. Catherine Zeta Jones called AGAIN to offer me fellatio. I had to say no.
    "Except Belial. He knows everything. This isn't a sarcastic attack, either. He really knows everything." -----Organichu
    "Alex is all knowing and perfect"-----Jane (loosely paraphrased)
    -515/745/700 bench/deadlift/squat
    Current mile time: 4:23
    Marathons: 3
    Century races: 3
    Ironmans: 1
    Ultramarathons: 1
    Current supps: http://www.atlargenutrition.com/prod...covery/results

  2. #102
    Proud Father Maki Riddington's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Location
    Vancouver, B.C.
    Posts
    5,324
    Originally posted by gopro
    First of all Maki...I am too busy to go look at my research to find articles I have read on the subject. Second, I do not put alot of credence in the studies anyway. They are too easily proved wrong. It happens everyday in the real world. I don't even put that much credence in studies that prove MY position. I go by what I have experienced not once, not dozens of times, but hundreds of times in the years I have spent teaching, training, and observing myself and my hundreds of clients.
    *** Ah, your too busy. Then why even read them in the first place or mention them? Unfortunately, anyone can come on board and tell how they have transformed hundreds of peoples bodies. If you backed your statements up with science and explained how it's happened to many of your clients I think people on this board would open their ears to what you have to say. But all you have to say is, it's worked for my clients and it's worked for me. How are we supposed to believe you?
    What are your credentials?
    Are they legit?
    Where are your records of your comps?
    Your pics ( you said they were wrecked in a flood)
    Maki Fit Blog

    At Large: Optimize Your Body | Dynamic Conditioning |
    My articles on Wannabebig

    "Soli Deo Gloria"
    "Test all things; hold fast what is good.": 1 Thessalonians 5:21

    "I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.
    So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God's law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God--through Jesus Christ our Lord!"
    Romans 7:14-25

    "Judo is not about strength. Yet in the learning curve, all Judokas get strong. Only with time do you learn where to apply that strength."
    The Art of Judo

  3. #103
    Senior Member Accipiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    layin up against a dumpster in a 100 dollar jumper, smothered in southern comfort.
    Posts
    4,076
    originally posted by neal

    In a matter of weeks I was able to thicken my biceps using a preacher curl machine and I brought out my inner lower triceps BIG TIME doing weighted bench dips.

    You weren't bringing out those specific part of the muscles. You were adding overall size to the muscle, thus making certain areas of the muscle appear larger.


    originally posted by gopro

    Aside from a select few people on this board, the majority of the lifting world IS on my side of the debate.

    A majority of people in lifting believe that the articles in Flex and Muscle&Fitness are actually written by the bodybuilders who sign their names to them. Doesn't mean it's true. A majority of people in lifting look at me funny when I do deadlifts, and tell me that I'm going to throw out my back. A majority of people in lifting say that their cousin, brother, or some other relative lost 3" off their height from squatting. Dont' mean it's true.

    originally posted by aznbb

    study using electromyography (EMG) shows that incline, decline, and flat bench press do not recruit the same amount of fibers.

    same ammount? no, of course not. But they didn't recruit from specific regions of one muscle.

    originally posted by body

    what happens if you get one of those electrical stimulator machines (mainly for the abs - forgot proper name). place this on one head of the bicep only. will this head get bigger and the other head not grow? will this make you look wierd? would both bicep heads grow, or know growth at all? If i have flawed reasoning with the bicpe please choose another muscle group to explain answers. could you target different heads with this approach? what would happen?(no actual other exercise done for sake od debate)

    nothign would, the belt wouldn't induce hypertrophy in great enough ammounts. Of course if we used a theoretical belt that could, both heads will grow equally, you can't work one head without working the other.

    originally posted by gopro

    First of all Maki...I am too busy to go look at my research to find articles I have read on the subject. Second, I do not put alot of credence in the studies anyway. They are too easily proved wrong. It happens everyday in the real world. I don't even put that much credence in studies that prove MY position. I go by what I have experienced not once, not dozens of times, but hundreds of times in the years I have spent teaching, training, and observing myself and my hundreds of clients. Too bad your not with me on this...I could get you in incredible shape for your show...if your still doing one. Can we end this fiasco now...I've got more important things to tend to.

    you're too busy? yet you can post here saying how maki, chris, dl, etc don't know what they're talking about? You haven't observed anything with your clients. You can magnify their muscle fiber and see what happens to it. you can't rewind them, and try doing a completely different exercise for a part and seeing what happens. What you're seeing is their muscles growing, not a specific region of a muscle being targeted. you're watching people fulfill their genetic potential, and observing what the results are. These results aren't a bigger 'upper inner' pec, but an overall larger person, whose genetics may or may not be for a certain shaped pec.

    Thus concludes the longest post I have ever made here.

  4. #104
    bone crusher
    Join Date
    Jan 2001
    Posts
    0
    wow that was comprehensive!

  5. #105
    Senior Member Accipiter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    layin up against a dumpster in a 100 dollar jumper, smothered in southern comfort.
    Posts
    4,076
    LOL, well I dind't even realize this thread was still alive...i posted back on the first page then just kinda forgot it was around...i wanted to catch up

  6. #106
    Simplistic
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM
    Posts
    2,179
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Accipiter
    [B]originally posted by neal

    In a matter of weeks I was able to thicken my biceps using a preacher curl machine and I brought out my inner lower triceps BIG TIME doing weighted bench dips.

    You weren't bringing out those specific part of the muscles. You were adding overall size to the muscle, thus making certain areas of the muscle appear larger.

    I had been doing BB curls and skulls for quite some time with good progress before I had tried these moves, so I don't buy into that theory.

  7. #107
    Party of "No." Tryska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    23,193
    you don't buy the theory that you added overall size to the muscle? only that they got bigger?

    b. please use an anatomical diagram and show me where your inner lower tricep is, independent of any of your other triceps..

    aznbb....how is it your able to flex your lower pec independently of your upper pec?
    A little learning is a dangerous thing...

    Live Dangerously! Learn a Little!


    Dude, did Doogie Howser just steal my fucking car?

  8. #108
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    god @#$^% damnit this **** again

  9. #109
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842

  10. #110
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    also, i think cack wrote this:

    Upper and Lower Chest, Can They be Separately Trained?

    I'm probably just wasting my time in writing this article, it really is a psuedo-debate and when it comes down to it, who gives a ****? Well, I wrote this article primarily out of frustration, it's just annoying to see "inclines for the upper chest, flat and decline for the lower" everywhere you look. This has to be one of the longest lasting and genuinely senseless myths in bodybuilding, so little old me is writing an article that refutes every single arguement perpetuated (probably to no avail) by those who still believe in muscle shaping. Read and learn...
    Killing The Myth

    The chest is composed of two different muscles and 5 different heads or parts. First, let's take a look at the pectoral major, which makes up the brunt of the pectorals mass. The pectoral major is split into two heads, the clavicular and the sternocostal (sternal). The clavicular portion of the pectoral major is often referred to as the upper chest, and the sternal as the lower. The clavicular head originates from the anterior clavicle (medial half) and inserts into the humerus (proximal anterior) and the intertubercular groove (outer lip). The function of this muscle is transverse flexion, transverse adduction, internal rotation, adduction, flexion, and abduction of the shoulder. The sternal head of the pectorals major originates from the sternum (anterior), second and sixth ribs, costal cartilages, and inserts into the humerus (proximal anterior) and the intertubercular groove (outer lip). The function of the sternal head of the pectoral major is transverse flexion, transverse adduction, internal rotation, adduction and extension of the shoulder and downward rotation, depression and abduction (initial) of the scapula. Wait! They DO have different functions! Not really, let's take a closer look. Notice that the only difference here is that the clavicular flexes the shoulder while the sternal does not and the sternal head is used in scapula movement. Let's take a look at what this really means: flexion of the shoulder is bending the joint resulting in a decrease of angle; moving the upper arm upward to the front, in practice this is a front dumbbell raise. This does not come into play in any chest movements; the only time this becomes a factor is during a Dumbbell front raise, which is primarily an anterior deltoid exercise in which the front deltoid would fail before the pectoral major is stimulated, hence making it completely inneffective for stimulating growth in the pectorals major in any way. OK, now let's look at what scapula downward rotation, depression, an initial abduction really are: downward rotation is rotary movement of the scapula; moving inferior angle of scapula medially and downward. In practice, that is basically pulling your shoulders back and downward. Do you do this in chest exercises? No, this is a primary function of the levator scapulae, and not the pectorals that only play a minor role in assisting this movement. Depression of the scapula is inferior movement of the shoulder girdle; moving the scapula down. This is simply pulling the shoulders directly back; again this does not come into play when training the chest although the sternal pectorals are the primary inducers of this. Then we have initial abduction, which is forward movement away the midline of the body; moving the scapula away from the spine during protraction of the shoulder girdle. In practice this is pushing the scapula forward (extend your arms out in front of you and push your shoulders forward without moving your arms). This is primarily a function of the pectorals minor and the serratus anterior; the sternal head of the pectoral major only plays a small role in assisting the movement. Now, let's take a look at the pectorals minor (which is actually considered part of the shoulder in some anatomy text). The pectoral minor has three heads (all three heads have the same function, therefore act as one muscle), and originates from the 3rd and 5th ribs, anterior surface and inserts into the scapula (superior anterior), and the coracoids process (medial border). The functions of the pectoral minor are scapula abduction, downward rotation (during abduction) and depression. Notice that the sternal head also shares the function, but only assists in this movement but the pectoral minor can do complete this movement without the major. As you can see, the sternal and clavicular portions of the pectorals major both share the same functions therefore cannot be separately targeted. You may have also noticed (if you did, good reading) that they appear to have different origins and insertion, but as far as mechanical function of the muscle is concerned, the pectorals major is actually one muscle and functions as one muscle (as explained above). Although the origins and insertion points are slightly different because of the pectorals majors origin from the sternum and the anterior surface of the proximal half of the clavicle this is considered to be an extensive but common insertion and origin for all practical purposes and mechanical function of the muscle. Do you see? Because of the human anatomy it is absolutely impossible to target the upper and lower chest as individual muscles!

    The pectoral minor runs underneath of the pectoral major just to the side of the arm pits, to demonstrate this to yourself try this: extend your arms out forward in front of your body as if in the lock-out position of a bench press, now without moving the arm at all just push with your shoulders (protract the scapula) and a small portion of your chest near the arm pit will contract and make your upper and outer chest appear "fuller". Notice how small the effect actually has on your entire chest. Many people mistake a pump or soreness in the pectoral minor as a pump or soreness in the clavicular portion of the pectoral major. Now, the only way to isolate (pretty much, anyway) the pectoral minor is to do the exercise you just performed, by pushing your shoulders without moving the arms, in other words, protracting the scapula. The pectoral minor is involved in all presses, and is also has the function of forward movement away from the midline of the body; moving the scapula away from the spine during protraction of the shoulder girdle. This, in practice, is an incline press movement. Note that this exercise cannot, and will not isolate the pectoral minor in any way, but it will put more stress on it than (say) a decline press, which would give the perception of the upper chest being worked, when in fact it is only the pectoral minor assisting the major and in no way will cause disproportionate hypertrophy in the pectorals as a whole. The reason you may be able to feel one exercise more than another in certain portions of the chest is due to proprioception which is the ability to sense the orientation and relative position of your body in space by interpreting neural feedback related to muscle fiber length and joint position. Proprioception occurs because the nervous system can, in fact, create differentiated neural feedback from motor units depending on the relative length of the component fibers, and this feedback tends to be (or is interpreted by the brain as) more intense when the fibers in question are either shortened (contracted) or lengthened (stretched) in the extreme (Belial, et al, 2001).

    To be continued...

    The common belief is that the incline press somehow causes the clavicular portion of the pectorals major to shorten more so than the sternal (EMG tests do support this, but not to a great enough degree to promote disproportionate hypertrophy), which is in some cases correct. But, this does not in any way mean that the fibers shortened to a greater degree will hypertrophy and/or produce more force than the fibers shortened to a lesser degree. This is because all of the sarcomeres (longitudinally repeated unit of a myofibril) of one myofibril (longitudinal unit of muscle fiber containing actin and myosin filaments) work in series. The force exerted on any element of a linear series (i.e. by any sarcomere in the myofibril) is equal to the force developed in each of the other elements of the series. Therefore, all sarcomeres of the myofibril exert the same force, and the force registered at the ends of the myofibrils does not depend on its length (Zatsiorsky, 1995, pg. 60). Note about EMG testing - electromyography (EMG) analysis is not considered accurate in measuring muscle fiber stimulation during the eccentric (lowering) portion of exercise, because during eccentric contraction less fibers are stimulated but damaged to a greater degree. Therefore on an EMG test it would read that there is little activity when in fact there is a lot of muscle fiber stimulation (the majority of growth stimulus occurs during the eccentric portion of the lift). The EMG test in itself is also flawed because just knowing which motor units are firing doesnít mean you can tell which fibers are contracting (which is what EMG tests determine), and the EMG test also does not measure fatigue or take leverage into account. The problem with emphasizing different portions or heads of muscles in in the way they are innervated. Motor neurons are aligned along the center of the muscle; each neuron innervates a number of fibers (through "axons"), the number of fibers varies. When that line of neurons are fired, all of them fire. In other words - when a muscle contracts, it all contracts making sectional hypertrophy impossible. Another often overlooked fact is that even though there may be a different level of activation in fibers, this difference is so small that disproportionate hypertrophy would not result. Additionally the number of test subjects are very small, Tudor Bompa usually uses 3-5 subjects, which leaves a lot of room for error. I could go on and on, but suffice to say that EMG tests are not accurate measures of muscle fiber stimulation and are not capable of predicting hypertrophy. Back to topic - the reality is that a decline and incline press will stress both heads of the pectoral major to a statistically equal degree. So, if one individual did only incline presses or that same individual did only decline presses, then this person would have absolutely no difference in the ratio of clavicular and sternal pectoral hypertrophy. In fact, the individual who performed decline only would have MORE clavicular hypertrophy because the decline press puts the pectoral major in it's strongest position, as well as minimizing the wink links (shoulders and triceps), which means the chest would be more of the primary mover instead of the shoulders (which is another culprit at causing the perception of an upper chest favor ability - pump or soreness of the anterior deltoid which is located on the front of the shoulder) as in an incline press.

    If all this is true, then why would someone be sore more so in the upper chest than the lower chest after an all incline versus all decline workout? Well, this goes back to the pectoral minor. First off, soreness is not fully understood as of now; the most commonly accepted theory of muscle soreness is that macrophage activity is the cause (the metabolic activity that is occurring, and the chemicals released by the macrophages (IGF-1, FGF, and certain prostaglandin's) during the process of phagocytosis stimulate the type IV receptors in the muscle, causing pain). So, why would there be more macrophage activity in your upper chest and not your lower? Well, let's take a look back at the chests anatomy. The pectoral major has two heads, the clavicular and the sternal. Then we have the pectoral minor (actually has three heads, but all share the same function so distinction is rarely noted) which runs underneath the pectorals major just about directly to the side of the armpits. The pectoral minor is a separate muscle, with a separate insertion and origin, and a separate function (it initializes a press). If your pectoral minor is sore, your upper/outer chest will be sore. If your pectorals major is sore, you whole chest will be sore. If both are sore, the whole chest will be sore, but more so in the upper/outer portion. This is not making one part of the chest sorer than another is; this is making one muscle sorer than another is. The clavicular and sternal heads of the pectorals major cannot be separated (these are what people refer to as the upper and lower chest), because human anatomy does not allow it.

    Certain individuals will be more or less strong in the incline position of a bench press versus the flat or decline positions. Because of this, it would seem to be logical to think that if your incline bench is stronger that your clavicular pectorals is stronger, and if your decline or flat press is stronger it is a product of a stronger sternal pectorals major. However, this difference in strength is actually a factor of the nervous system. When we do an exercise for an extended period (more than 6 weeks, in general) our nervous system becomes optimized in that specific movement by recruiting motor units in a pattern that is optimal for the movement. So, if you concentrate the majority of your efforts on doing the incline press then your nervous system will by optimized in the incline press and not the flat or decline, so your strength will be greater in the incline position. This is in no way a factor of a strength difference between the clavicular and sternal heads of the pectorals major, it is simply a factor of the nervous system being able to perform the incline better than flat or decline because of neurological optimization in the specific plane of movement. There are also other muscles involved in performing a press. The deltoids and triceps are the two major synergists in the bench press, and by altering the angle in which the press is performed you will be able to recruit these muscles more or less. For example, in the incline press because of the more upright position (one of the deltoids primary functions is bending the joint resulting in a decrease of angle; moving the upper arm upward to the front - a military or overhead press) the deltoids will become more involved in the movement which will allow for more weight to be used. This increased activation of the deltoids in the incline press isnít necessarily a good thing though, because on an incline press the weak links will almost always fail before the chest (this may not be true in certain cases such as pre-fatigue, however). The shoulders and triceps are the weak links, putting the bench on an incline will bring the shoulders more into play, and put the pectorals major in a considerably weaker position. One of the pectoral majorís primary functions is to pull the arms across the chest and downward - therefore a decline press/dips are the best among the presses. A dip/decline press will minimize the weak links (the lats will come into play more, but they act only as a stabilizer and offer little to the performance of a press, and are not a "weak" link and will therefore not fail before the chest), and put the chest in its strongest position consequently increasing the potential for muscle stimulation in the pectorals major (I said potential because you still have to do the work, and if you donít you wonít reap the benefits, for obvious reasons). I am in no way saying that exercise variation is bad. It does in fact recruit different motor units (in terms of percentage of activated motor units), which will activate different fibers and within reason will ignite additional muscle growth with the nutritional support necessary. This wonít, of course, create sectional hypertrophy in the given muscle, though.

    Now, let's take a more real-world approach to answering this controversy. It doesn't take very long to realize that working the upper and lower chest to produce disproportionate amounts of hypertrophy doesn't work in practice, or in theory. Let's go straight to where this phenomenon would be most likely to be seen. The amazing before and after pictures in which normal people like you and I have transformed their bodies to extremes barely imaginable. Note that although steroid use and other illegal practices are often used in these competitions, it would not in any way have an effect on muscle shape, which is what weíre looking for here. Take a look at all of these before and after pictures, have you ever, EVER seen the shape of a muscle (specifically the chest) change shape? If you have, take a look at the pose. For example, the gap between the biceps may appear to be "filled inĒ if one takes the bicep out of it's fully supinated position. Try it yourself: turn your wrist so that your palm faces up, now turn it back. The brachialis and brachioradialis will "fill in the gap". Iíve heard people refer to Larry Scott to be someone to change the shape of his muscle, in this case his biceps. In early photos of him he would pose with the bicep fully supinated, as he gained experience he learned that keeping the arm semi-supinated filled in the gap to make his bicep appear longer (for the aforementioned reasons).

    Enough of what isnít possible, what CAN you do in regards to muscle shaping? Unfortunately, there isnít much you can do to change the shape of individual muscles, but what you can do is make these weaknesses less apparent. For example, if your upper chest appears to be underdeveloped then bringing up the pectorals minor and anterior deltoids, as well as increasing the overall size of the pectoral major will lessen the obviousness of this. You can also bring weak body parts up to par with stronger body parts through specialization/prioritization of your training. For example, if your arms are underdeveloped and your legs are overdeveloped then by focusing on your arms by putting more stress on them while simultaneously putting less stress on the legs (by decreasing training volume, intensity, etc) your arms, in time, will become less of a weakness compared to your legs. There is also the much more extreme option of surgery. Through surgery we can alter the origins are insertions of our muscles which would consequently change their shape. This practice has been shown to create very large decreases in muscular strength, coordination, mechanical function, motor unit activation, among other things. This basically means that although the shape of your muscle will be changed it will be at the expense of the proper use of this muscle, which isnít a very good trade-off for those interested in bodybuilding and/or strength training. When it is all said and done, trying to change the shape of your individual muscles in a complete waste of time because it quite simply just is not possible. Your efforts should be focused on increasing the size of your muscles (muscle hypertrophy), the strength of your muscles, nervous system, and other strength promoting factors and when needed reducing fat mass.

  11. #111
    Cottage cheese addict LiftAgain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    216
    Originally posted by gopro
    Yes, and bumblebees shouldn't be able to fly, but they do....
    Well that's another myth that has been proven wrong by modern science...

    "Well-known myth says that scientists once proved that bumblebees should not be able to fly. The myth started from an over-simplified calculation on a napkin at a dinner party..."

    http://physicsweb.org/article/news/5/10/9

    "The notion that bumblebee flight is impossible according to the conventional rules of aerodynamics is a reflection of the poor understanding of aerodynamic principles in the early 20th century"

    http://www.howstuffworks.com/news-item223.htm


  12. #112
    Banned Reinier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    south west Holland Europe
    Posts
    8,842
    of course they can theoretically fly.
    they do, so they can. some stupid ****

  13. #113
    Cottage cheese addict LiftAgain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    216
    LOL!!!

  14. #114
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    339
    Guys...enjoy your science...in fact, buy yourselves a white lab coat to train in...stay small, stay weak...I really don't care...I'm here to stay...see ya when I'm 285...
    Last edited by gopro; 03-28-2002 at 07:13 AM.

  15. #115
    MA's Bionic Creation syntekz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Indianapolis, Indiana
    Posts
    4,756
    Don't hurt yourself with the needle big guy!

  16. #116
    Baby Seal Clubber ElPietro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    Posts
    12,778
    Haha enjoy your ignorance and misconceptions. You have a very poor learning process. That's why I feel this is one of the best boards there is. If someone like you posts something without any backup people are ready to disprove you. You say you don't have time to back up claims that you make in a thread YOU started to find an answer.

    I guess the world is flat as well right? If I have to pick a side it will definitely be with scientific method over your, i have trained millions of people. Perhaps you should have an infomercial on your techniques...you could market the abtronics in there as well. My apologies if I sound offensive I just don't like it when someone acts as hypocritical as you are right now. You ask a question to prove a point, people take THIER valuable time to reply and provide what research they can find but you refuse to do likewise.

    That is a very poor attitude and I pity those you train if that's how you try to help them develop. But I'm sure your trainees have the biggest type II D fibres in the world.

    Experience is a great tool, however, it is easily nullified by ignorance.
    Deadlifts are like women, they'll hurt you everytime, but they'll also make you a man. - Me

    Friends don't let friends do dumbell kickbacks. - Me

    ElP is the smartest man in the world. - Gyno Rhino

    A low voter turnout is an indication of fewer people going to the polls. -- Dan Quayle

    If do right, no can defense. -- Mr. Miyagi

    Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey:

    I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it.

    Is there anything more beautiful than a beautiful, beautiful flamingo, flying across in front of a beautiful sunset? And he's carrying a beautiful rose in his beak, and also he's carrying a very beautiful painting with his feet. And also, you're drunk.

    Current FFFA Enforcer

  17. #117
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    339
    Originally posted by syntekz
    Don't hurt yourself with the needle big guy!
    Sorry bro...100% natural for life...

  18. #118
    Player Hater PowerManDL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    Posts
    7,850
    Not if that competition pic on ironmagazine and your current quoted stats are true.
    Vin Diesel has a fever.. and the only prescription is more cowbell.

    Budiak: That girl I maced
    Budiak: macked
    Budiak: heh maced
    Budiak: I wish

    ShmrckPmp5: a good thing people can't fire guns through the computer...your ass would have been shot years ago

    Y2A 47: youre smooth as hell
    Y2A 47: thats why you get outta tickets, and into panties

    galileo: you're a fucking beast and I hate you
    galileo: hate

    assgrabbers are never subtile, they will grabb ass whereever they go,public or not, I know the type, because I am one. - Rock

  19. #119
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    339
    Originally posted by ElPietro
    Haha enjoy your ignorance and misconceptions. You have a very poor learning process. That's why I feel this is one of the best boards there is. If someone like you posts something without any backup people are ready to disprove you. You say you don't have time to back up claims that you make in a thread YOU started to find an answer.

    I guess the world is flat as well right? If I have to pick a side it will definitely be with scientific method over your, i have trained millions of people. Perhaps you should have an infomercial on your techniques...you could market the abtronics in there as well. My apologies if I sound offensive I just don't like it when someone acts as hypocritical as you are right now. You ask a question to prove a point, people take THIER valuable time to reply and provide what research they can find but you refuse to do likewise.

    That is a very poor attitude and I pity those you train if that's how you try to help them develop. But I'm sure your trainees have the biggest type II D fibres in the world.

    Experience is a great tool, however, it is easily nullified by ignorance.
    El Pietro...don't feel bad for my clients...feel bad for those that are NOT my clients.

    Again, I don't need science to prove my point. Besides, I am not trying to prove anyone wrong. I am here to give my opinions on how people can grow to their fullest potential. Others' are responsible for the arguments...not me.

    Oh well...how much longer is this gonna go on???????

  20. #120
    As I Am Paul Stagg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Baltimore, MD, USA
    Posts
    8,669
    "Sorry Maki...I forgot...you see I totally believe you CAN selectively target certain areas of a muscle and its motor units which I further believe will elicit more growth in that area."


    ** Then you have no idea at all about muscle physiology.

    Perhaps when you renew your ISSA certification, you'll take that class.
    Squats work better than supplements.
    "You know, if I thought like that, I'd never put more than one plate on the bar for anything, I'd never use bands or chains, I'd never squat to parallel or below, and I'd never let out the slightest grunt when I lift. At some point in your lifting career (assuming you're planning on getting reasonably strong and big), you're going to have to accept that most people think you are some kind of freak." -Sensei
    "You're wrong, and I have a completely irrelevant pubmed abstract that may or may not say so." - Belial
    I has a blog.
    I has a facebook.

  21. #121
    As I Am Paul Stagg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Baltimore, MD, USA
    Posts
    8,669
    Power...you can provide studies proving your point and so can I. There is research on both sides. But screw the research! I see what happens right in front of my eyes...this is what truly makes me believe. Besides science can be quite silly...scientists used to say that steroids don't work...what a joke!

    ** Actually, you can't provide these studies. You keep saying you can, but I've yet to see one.
    Squats work better than supplements.
    "You know, if I thought like that, I'd never put more than one plate on the bar for anything, I'd never use bands or chains, I'd never squat to parallel or below, and I'd never let out the slightest grunt when I lift. At some point in your lifting career (assuming you're planning on getting reasonably strong and big), you're going to have to accept that most people think you are some kind of freak." -Sensei
    "You're wrong, and I have a completely irrelevant pubmed abstract that may or may not say so." - Belial
    I has a blog.
    I has a facebook.

  22. #122
    As I Am Paul Stagg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Baltimore, MD, USA
    Posts
    8,669
    Gopro

    You ARE making this personal. You need to change your sig line, now.

    Further, you tell us that science proves your statement, then you tell us to ignore it and that YOUR experience is what matters.

    You have yet to post a study baking up anything you claim.

    And I DO know who you are, and I did some checking. You called me a coward. I post and write articles using my real name. Do you? What are you afraid of?

    Anyone thinking of hiring you might want to verify your certifications. I have the numbers (and some names of contacts) at several of these organizations) if anyone needs them.

    Where are the results of the Mr Eastern Natural USA (or whatever) on the web. I can find almost any podunk local contest, yet I can't find this one.

    You saying lots of people are asking you for help is like suzanne summers telling us she sold lots of thighmasters. Both show the lack of intelligence of a great part of our population.

    I'd suggest you resume this conversation when you have a shred of factual evidence to back it up.
    Last edited by Paul Stagg; 03-28-2002 at 07:53 AM.
    Squats work better than supplements.
    "You know, if I thought like that, I'd never put more than one plate on the bar for anything, I'd never use bands or chains, I'd never squat to parallel or below, and I'd never let out the slightest grunt when I lift. At some point in your lifting career (assuming you're planning on getting reasonably strong and big), you're going to have to accept that most people think you are some kind of freak." -Sensei
    "You're wrong, and I have a completely irrelevant pubmed abstract that may or may not say so." - Belial
    I has a blog.
    I has a facebook.

  23. #123
    Soon to be lean... Joe Black's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Cambridge, England
    Posts
    10,963
    here is where it stops go pro.

    Heres how I see it. Basically you post on bb boards to attract attention to yourself to gain clients. All you do is mention this client this, this client that.. Even when you say you will provide any type of info apart from that you never do.

    This is also obvious when, you realised there would not be a mod position at wbb in competitors you decided to post much more elsewhere where you were allowed to have a signiture advertising your services and be a mod. We have also had differences over the article you promised would go to wbb but then at the last minute allowed someone else to use it, going back on your word.

    You make pretty big claims of being 250+ and natural of which there is little hope you are going to back up with pics. You had a flood? So go take some this afternoon, you could have them developed by tommorow. It ain't that hard.

    you make claims of being a successfull competitor. lets have the names of the contests, dates, places.. lets hear it. why make claims and refuse to back them up?

    I also feel you are just going out of your way to disagree with what most people agree with on here to surround yourself in contreversy (oh more attention)

    so basically, stop it, act like everyone else does, don't make claims or advice that you are not prepared to back up AT ALL. This may work on some other forums but not here.

    Soo..... this thread ends here as does these stupid aguements.

    Anything else that needs to be said can be done via pm.
    http://www.wannabebig.com/logo/alnlogo_black.gif

    AtLarge Nutrition Supplements Ė Get the best supplements and help support Wannabebig!

    Hypertrophy Cluster Training - HCT-12 - If you want big gains in size and strength, huge decreases in body fat, or both - check out HCT-12.

    Can I have some lean muscle & strength please? Ė My Training Journal

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •