145 DB Rows! Got Dang! Nice work man......
" ...if all else fails, just whip out those b'normous biceps!!!!!!! Teh lad33z <3 teh str3ngth!"- McIrish
"An Irishman has an abiding sense of tragedy which sustains him through temporary periods of joy..."
"When a man is in love, is jealous, and has been whipped by the Inquisition, he is no longer himself..."- Voltaire
Nice strength aka! Those DB Rows are crazy man. Nice job on the EZ Bar Curls too, and of course the Seated Hammer Curls.
SMOKING curls with the EZ bar! And some powerful rowing.......My math error on your HS Press stuff call it 240....still nothing to be too bummed about......you've got some awesome strength! and yeah I envy the over developed ab strength too!
I do all my lifts without assistance from straps or chalk. I stopped using straps for DB rows back in late January. The combination of stricter form and grip exercises (static holds) has eliminated my need for straps on DB rows. The only exercise where my grip is sometimes a limitation is SLDLs. I am hoping that BB static holds will build up my grip faster than my strength increases on the SLDLs.
Thanks. This session went very well, unlike the previous one. Perhaps the extra sleep contributed to my performance.
clvmike19, wibble, and Wikked1:
Thanks. I tend to be stronger on pull exercises like rows and curls than push exercises, such as the bench press. I would feel better about the rows, if I was able to maintain my strict form at 145lb. I plan to drop down to a lighter weight on my final set next week.
Sunday’s Training Log
I slept approximately 9 hours using 25mg doxylamine succinate (OTC antihistamine sleeping aid).
Weights: Session #1
Quads & Glutes
Bold = Largest weight ever used for given exercise
- Deeper Squats – Warmup Sets, 350x8 (+5lb), 350x8 (+5lb)
The “deeper” indicates a change in depth. I descended to parallel or below parallel for all reps. I had some form problems during the second set and leaned to the left while ascending. Nevertheless, these were good sets. I was able to maintain or increase reps with a 5lb increase in weight.
- Full Squats with Pause at Bottom – 290x8 (+5lb), 290x8 (+5lb)
I was feeling very exhausted by the time I began the second set. My fatigue influenced my form. I let gravity carry me down and had less resistance while descending than I usually do. This resulted in having a smoother decent than normal and reaching a lower position than normal. I was just barely able to complete the 8th rep of the final set. I was sweating heavily after completing the set and measured my HR at more than 90% of my maximum.
- Deep Lunges – 255 x 8/8 (+1R/+1R)
My lower back was feeling very sore when I started these lunges. I hope that this does not indicate my lower back problems are returning. I had better control during this exercise than last week, yet I came closer to failure than I have in months..
(+X lb) = Personal Best -- added X lbs to record maximum
(+X R) = Personal Best -- added X reps to max at given weight
Weights: Session #2
Hamstrings & Abs
Bold = Largest weight ever used for given exercise
- Lying Leg Curls – ###x6 (+5lb), ###x6 (+5lb)
All sets were done using 130lb of plates with my home gym attachment. I did not officially list weights above since this attachment is not comparable to any gym machine. Last week the final rep or two in the second set may have had incomplete ROM, so stopped earlier than normal this week and dropped down from 8 to 6 reps with a 5lb increase in weight. I plan to stay at this weight next week.
- Incline Sit-ups with DBs over head – BW+70 x12 (+5lb), BW+70 x12 (+5lb)
I held a pair of DBs over my head instead of a single DB again this week. This change makes it much easier to hold the weight.
- Twisting Crunch – BW+55 x 12/12 (+5lb)
I am experimenting with substitutes for Russian twists since it is getting awkward to hold heavy dumbbells. I believe that I had a smaller ROM than in most previous weeks.
- Vertical Leg Raises and a few other exercises in a drop set style
- Thick Barbell Static Holds – 315 x 24 seconds (+5 seconds), 315 x 22 seconds (+3 seconds)
I am calling this a “thick barbell” because the barbell in my home gym is thicker than all of the ones at my membership gym. The thickness and smoothness makes it especially difficult to grip. Both sets were to failure (until barbell slipped out of my hands). I am disappointed with these sets. I was expecting a larger gain. I plan to stay at 315lb until I reach 30 seconds..
(+X lb) = Personal Best -- added X lbs to record maximum
(+X R) = Personal Best -- added X reps to max at given weight
I split this workout into two short sessions again for convenience. I keep volume low in this workout to minimize interference with tomorrow’s running. As mentioned earlier, I have changed my routine so that I have one heavy low rep (3x5) leg day, and one lighter high rep (2x8) leg day in each 8 days. This change reduces stress on my lower back. This workout is my second 8 rep session. I think I will continue with this strategy in future workouts.
I have changed my training schedule so this is a rest day instead of a moderate intensity cycling day.
My calorie total was lower than expected today.
- 3500-3600 calories
- Snack 1 – Oatmeal, 10oz package broccoli, 1-2 oz turkey breast, a few peanuts
- Snack 2 – Oatmeal, 1-2 oz turkey breast, a few peanuts
- Meal 1 – Large bowl Nature O’s cereal with skim milk, small snapper fillet
- Snack 3 – Air-popped popcorn, ~1 oz turkey breast
- Meal 2 - Large bowl black beans mixed with brown rice, sweet potato, small serving turkey breast, a few peanuts
- Meal 3 - Large bowl oatmeal, chicken breast, brown rice, large apple, 10 oz package green beans, a few peanuts
- Meal 4 – Nature O’s cereal with skim milk, 10 oz package brussel sprouts, ~2 oz snapper fillet
2g flax oil, 3g fish oil
Last edited by aka23; 03-31-2004 at 09:15 PM.
Awesome workout aka, you've gained in every exercise!
Good workout again! Your squats are really impressive it's no wonder your back gets sore.....
Aka, to what do you attribute your constant improvement in every single workout? You make PRs in every single workout with weights and in aerobic conditioning. I have never seen such progress.
In addition, all the research I have read indicates that concurrent aerobic and strength training negatively effects strength progress, yet your legs just keep getting stronger.
Chris, I noticed that too. The only thing I can think of is his high caloric intake. From what I've seen, it's over 3500. He seems to compensate by at least eating enough.
Not to mention the gram of test a week.
Oh, and the celltech.
I hope by test you mean extreme hard work and dedication. You're right about the celltech though. I've seen a picture of aka in a magazine advertising it. Don't you know he keeps gaining because of the 1048% increase in anabolism?Originally Posted by fuzz
No, by test I meant testosterone enanthate, a class III scheduled steroid.
Originally Posted by wibble
I'm sure chris wasn't insinuating anything, though.
chris,Originally Posted by chris mason
First I want to clarify while I do set PRs (I consider a rep PR a valid PR, as well as a max weight PR) in nearly every weight training session, I do not set PRs in the majority of my aerobic conditioning sessions. I am surprised that you did not notice this in my earlier training logs from a few days ago. In two of my six cardio sessions, I either do not attempt to set PRs or am limited by the resistance of the machine. Two of the remaining four are weight bearing sessions on the treadmill. My increased weight is a hindrance, and I no longer expect to improve due to my increased weight. I performed my best when I was lighter, with the possible exception of short HIIT sprints. I set distance PRs in the remaining two non-weight bearing cardio sessions about 1/2 of the time. When I do set PRs, it is usually by a small amount. Sometimes less than 0.5%. I suspect that these improvements in non-weight bearing sessions are primarily related to increased strength.
During the year I have kept this journal, I have almost constantly been on a slow bulk. I have never cut. Gaining ~30lb of LBM is obviously a key factor in my strength improvements. My strength gains have slowed down in recent months, but I believe I am still well below my genetic potential. Other factors in the continued improvement including switching exercises when improvement slows, maintaining a consistent diet and training routine (abnormal sessions often produce abdnormal results), and never testing or training for 1 rep maxes (continued improvement at higher reps is possible on a week to week basis, continued improvement at 1 rep max on same exercise on week to week basis is less likely). Quite a few other persons who have journals on this site set PRs in nearly every weight session while bulking.
I think many bodybuilders fears of aerobic conditioning are greatly exagerrated. There are plenty of other studies which found no significant interference between concurrent training. Some examples are below. I believe that one of the key reasons for the mixed results is poorly designed concurrent training setups.Originally Posted by chris mason
One can also find studies which found negative effects. I believe that a large portion of these studies have major flaws such as poorly designed training setups. For example, many concurrent studies do the aeroboic and strength sessions sequentially without break. In some cases the strength session follows the cardio session. Doing intense cardio immediately before weightlifting sessions is obviously not a desirable way to train and may negatively effect strength gains.
I know that you are often more interested in real world examples than scientific studies. One such example is Joe Decker who is also known as "The World's Fittest Man." Joe Decker once ran a 142 mile race in the Sahara desert, but he also can bench press 400lbs. Once he placed 4th in his category of a strongman competition a week after winning a 50 mile race.
There are several ways in which cardio and strength activities could potentially interfere with each other. Obviously cardio burns calories and calories must be increased to compensate. Similarly a large carb consumption and frequent carb consumption, as occurs in my diet helps refuel glycogen reserves more rapidly.
Many bodybuilders seem to fear cardio “burning their muscles.” I think there is little risk of muscle catabolism as a result of exercise unless the exercise is done in extreme conditions. Protein is generally not a significant source of fuel in exercise. It may become significant in extreme conditions that deplete glycogen levels, especially liver glycogen. Liver glycogen levels fall in a more linear manner than muscle glycogen. Muscle glycogen levels do not drop as quickly at lower levels, as fat usage increases.
This might include exercise done when glycogen levels are low (for example in morning on empty stomach); several hours of continuous moderate intensity exercise; or HIIT in which sprints totaled roughly 30 minutes to an hour, depending on many factors such as intensity. I believe Hultman & Bosch's research suggested roughly 50% muscle glycogen depletion after 6+ hours at 50% VO2Max, ~2hours 40min at 70% VO2Max, ~1 hour 40 min at 75% VO2Max, ~1 hour at 85% VO2Max, ~30 minutes at 120%VO2Max (sprint HIIT), and ~15 minutes at 150% VO2Max (sprint HIIT). Even under conditions of complete muscle glycogen depletion, protein still only accounts for a small portion energy usage during exercise. The study http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.f...5&dopt=Abstract at 60% VO2Max for 1 hour under complete CHO depletion estimated ~10% of energy usage was from protein. It is important to note that protein usage does not equal muscle catabolism. Much of the protein comes from other sources. In short, I think there is little to worry about unless the exercise is done in unusual conditions such as after fasting, or while on a low-carb diet.
I think a more significant concern is interference from “overtraining”/overusage of the legs. This has been a problem for me and limits the volume and intensity at which I can train. I minimize such problems by rotating cardio activities, sticking to lower volume leg workouts, separating my higher intensity leg workouts from each other, not doing higher intensity cardio sessions on sequential days, and not doing cardio on leg day.
A final and more complicated method of interference is muscle/fiber/metabolism specialization issues. Again I believe that such effects have been greatly exaggerated. This might be a concern at elite/competition levels, but I believe that the average person has little to worry about. There is some evidence that a reasonable amount of training one type of system may improve the other. This is especially true for aerobic/distance athletes. When ultramarathon runners first incorporate speed training, a form of “anaerobic” (anaerobic is a misnomer since anaerobic activities can and do occur in aerobic conditions) training like weight lifting, they see rapid improvements in their pace even though they do not run at a pace above their lactate threshold. After this result became common knowledge, nearly all modern elite distance runners incorporate “anaerobic” speed training into their workouts. Many incorporate regular strength training as well, including my college’s cross country team which won both the men and womens Div I national championships when I was in school.
I have little evidence to support this, but I feel that my cardio sessions have improved my weight training sessions. My body is used to pushing itself at a near maximum intensity for long periods of time. When I do squats, my HR may often exceeds 85%MHR. For me this is no big deal. I sometimes work out at this high a HR for as long as a half hour. My HIIT sessions are more likely to have direct benefits such as improving lactate removal and tolerance to exercise in lower PH conditions (higher rep sets). I do not feel that my legs have undergone major aerobic based adaptations. This is evident by my 5 mile sprint/jog (HIIT) time being faster than my 5 mile constant pace time.
Last edited by aka23; 04-02-2004 at 03:44 AM.
wibble, Wikked1, and CoCoa,
Thanks. This workout turned better than expected, and I tend to gain rapidly on leg/core exercises. I am somewhat concerned about the lower back problems. It would be a shame if I am unable to do heavy squats and heavy SLDLs in the same week during future sessions.
I think rate of weight gain/loss is more important than number of calories. Formulas and calorie calculators do not work well for a large portion of persons for reasons such as metabolism and activity level differences. Some people my size may gain weight with 2500 calories a day, while others may need 5000 calories or more. Over the past couple months, I have averaged about a 1/2 pound per week gain.
I have discussed the results of my blood testosterone level tests with you elsewhere. A person taking 1g test per week would have a lot higher testosterone levels than I do, and would probably follow a different style of bulking. I have been mostly eating according to appetite recently.
Last edited by aka23; 04-02-2004 at 03:38 AM.
Of course, aka. I was only joking. =)
Workouts are looking nice as usual!
I think this is possibly the all-time best response on WBB. - Jorge Sanchez
"you're an animal eat like one damn it!" - Wikked1
"Now we're finally getting to the chicken or the egg question," I grinned. "Did I eat all that food because my size gives me more of an appetite, or did I get to be this big because I've been forcing myself to eat like this for years?"
From A Body Builder is Born
i knew you were a beast but not that kinda of a beast that eats grown men and children.. lilmase
I realized that you were joking. I sometimes give a serious response to questions that are not serious.
Thanks for the compliment. I think this was one of the best squat/lunge workouts I have had in a long time.
It is interesting to note that 2 of the 4 studies you referenced noted they were performed with sedentary individuals. I am willing to bet the other 2 were also done with sedentary folks. That makes perfect sense to me. Now, with an experienced trainee the results should be very different. In fact, I have noted that aerobic training of any sort impairs my strength.
I know this much, the muscular adaptations to each type of training are in direct opposition with each other. It makes no sense you can maximize both.
To me, making progress in virtually every single weight training session is maximizing your progress.
Actually, the studies I have referenced show that strength training performed with aerobic training will not hinder the aerobic training, but will hinder the absolute strength gains.
I suppose my question is why do you feel you have been able to progress with such incredible regularity over an extended period of time?
Last edited by chris mason; 04-02-2004 at 03:21 PM.
I have a different interpretation of maximizing progress. The fact that someone is improving from one session to the next does not mean that they are maximizing progress. They may be able to progress at a faster rate with training changes, dietary changes, etc. I would likely progress at a faster overall rate by incorporating more periodization into my routine instead of trying to increase reps or weight used during nearly every session.Originally Posted by chris mason
That is a very broad statement. Endurance activities act more on type I fibers than type II, while strength activities act more on type II fibers than type I. There is overlap, but not all muscular adaptations conflict with one other. Certainly there is some conflict and one would could not reach their maximum potential in both an endurance sport and strength lifting at the same time. I never claimed to do this and maximize both. What I claimed was that I believe the degree of interference is greatly exaggerated by many bodybuilders, and I do not think it should be a major concern with until one reaches elite/competition levels or endurance training is excessive. It is possible simultaneously improve both strength and endurance activities.Originally Posted by chris mason
I am guessing you mean the studies I referenced since you did not list any studies. The conclusions to these four studies are listed below:Originally Posted by chris mason
“CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate 3-d x wk(-1) concurrent performance of both strength and endurance training does not impair adaptations in strength, muscle hypertrophy, and neural activation induced by strength training alone. Results provide a physiological basis to support several performance studies that consistently indicate 3-d x wk(-1) concurrent training does not impair strength development over the short term.”
“Results indicate 3 d.wk-1 combined training can induce substantial concurrent and compatible increases in VO2peak and strength performance.”
“These findings indicate that no significant differences in strength gains were observed between subjects performing concurrent endurance and resistance training or resistance training only. However, the time-course of adaptations between groups was somewhat different.”
“Concurrent S(trength) and E(ndurance) training did not interfere with S(trength) or E(ndurance) development in comparison to S or E training alone.”
These conclusions do not seem to support your statement about hindering absolute strength gains. However, I do believe that excessive endurance training will negatively affect strength gains to some degree. What I question is whether a more reasonable amount of endurance training will have a significant overall effect assuming proper diet, no overusage/overtraining, etc. It is also important to define how we are measuring strength. I would expect a different effect in explosive/power events and higher rep strength work.
The main reasons areOriginally Posted by chris mason
-- During the year I have kept this journal, I have almost constantly been on a slow bulk. I have never cut. Being in a caloric surplus and gaining lean body mass greatly increases the likelihood of progress in the gym.
--I maintain a very consistent diet, training, and lifestyle. Such consistency increases the chances of consistent results. I do have a bad session every now and then and do not make progress or make negative progress. During the first few months of the journal, I made virtually no improvements on my bench press. There was a period last year in which I broke my arm. It took me many months to fully recover my strength. I still am behind my preaccident PR from July in triceps extensions.
--When my improvement stalls, I sometimes switch to a different exercise. When starting this new exercise, I usually go through a period in which I have a period of rapid gains (neural, technique), even if it uses the same muscle groups.
--I rarely do any lower rep work (under 5 reps). Constantly doing heavy low rep work puts a large stress on the CNS. This makes it often not practical to make gains on the same exercise without temporarily switching to higher rep range, a different exercise/ROM, or extending rest periods.
Last edited by aka23; 04-02-2004 at 05:17 PM.
Actually, strength activities hit all types. Fibers are recruited in a specific order regardless of load. Heavy training does not skip the type I fibers, it includes them with the larger type II fibers.
The difference is that the adaptation of the musculature is diametrically opposed to the two training types. Aerobic training increases the muscle cell's ability to use oxygen via an increase in mitochondria. Strength training will increase the size of the contractile proteins, something which decreases the muscle cell's ability to efficiently use oxygen.
I do agree that you can increase size and aerobic capacity simultaneously, but only to a certain degree.
I did not say that strength training skips type I fibers. I said it acts "more on type II fibers than type I fibers". Type II fibers hypertrophy first and to a greater degree that type I fibers with typical strength training. Such adaptations primarily occur in type II fibers, although they also occur in type I fibers, especially as rep range increases. In contrast, type II fibers do not get stressed much in endurance activities until intensity increases. And again the fact that such effects may occur does not mean that there will be a significant amount of interference with concurrent training, as shown in the referenced studies.
Last edited by aka23; 04-02-2004 at 05:09 PM.
Ok, let me reference a few studies as well:
1)Hickson, R.C., Interference of strength development by simultaneously training for strength and endurance; European Journal of Applied Physiology and Occupational Therapy; 45:255-269; 1980.
2) Dudley, G. and Djamil R. Incompatability of endurance and strength training modes of exercise. Journal of Applied Physiology, Volume 59; Number 5; pp. 1446-1451, 1985.
3) Ono, M., Miya****a, M. and T. Asami. Inhibitory effect of long distance running training on the vertical jump and other performances among aged males. In: Biomechanics V-B, P. Komi (ed);Baltimore, Md: University Park Press, 1981, pp.94-100.
4) Sale. D.G.; Jacobs, I.; Macdougall, J.D.; and Garner, S.; Comparison of two regimens of concurrent strength and endurance training. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise; Volume 22; No. 3; June, 1990; pp 348-356.
The above are references noted in Encyclopedia of Weight-Training by doctors Robert and Paul Ward.
You can also check out this information:
Training Adaptations in Skeletal Muscle
Adaptability is a fundamental characteristic of skeletal muscle (and the body in general). The nature of this adaptation can be summarized using the following principle: The cell will adapt in a manner that tends to minimize any movement away from homeostasis, or resting conditions. In exercise physiology we refer to the acute changes that occur in a sytem, organ, or cell during exercise as responses. An example is the increase in heart rate that occurs when we jump up from our chair and start jogging. Those long term changes that occur as a result of repeated bouts of exercise are called adaptations. Cellular adaptations generally involve an increase or decrease in the rate of synthesis of a specific cellular component. All muscle cells are in a constant state of synthesis and degradation. If synthesis rate exceeds degradation rate, an increase in the cellular component occurs. A change in protein synthesis requires a cellular signal. Biologists and physiologists continue to explore the communiction process by which different forms of muscular work induce cellular changes. At the cellular level, there are some theories, but no complete understanding. However, we do know quite a bit about what adaptations do occur, even if we aren't sure how just yet.
Contrast Between Maximal Strength and Maximal Endurance
If we could build a skeletal muscle for the purpose of endurance, what would the recipe be? Since the heart is the supreme endurance muscle, let's look at it first.
Characteristics of Fatigue Resistant Muscle Cells
Heart cells are smaller in diameter than skeletal muscle cells. This results in very short diffusion distance between oxygen molecules coming from capillaries and the mitochondria where they are used.
The surrounding network of capillaries is extremely well developed. This characteristic also facililitates even and rapid oxygen distribution to all myocardial cells.
The mitochondrial density of heart cells is extremely high, 20-25% of cell volume in adults. Mitochondria use oxygen to metabolise food and produce ATP.
The cytoplasmic enzymes responsible for breaking down fatty acid molecules into 2 carbon fragments that can enter the mitochondria are present in high concentrations.
Contractile protein makes up about 60% of cell volume. The ATPase subtype found in heart is slower than that seen in skeletal muscle. Consequently, the rate of force development is slower, although absolute tension/cell diameter is the same.
Heart lactate dehydrogenase, the enzyme that converts pyruvate to lactic acid competes poorly with pyruvate dehydrogenase. This contributes to the very low lactate production in heart cells despite high metabolic flux.
So, heart cells display almost zero fatiguability due to the tremendous capacity they have to receive and consume oxygen. Fatigue resistance is traded for anaerobic capacity. This is why the heart has little tolerance for oxygen deprivation, or a heart attack. If we want to build a skeletal muscle that is highly fatigue resistant, it must resemble heart muscle in its basic features.
Now let's build a muscle that is optimized for brief efforts and maximum force production. Here are the characteristics needed.
Characteristics of Maximal Strength Muscle Cells
Each muscle cell should contain a high volume of contractile protein. Since oxygen diffusion is not a concern, making the cell diameter larger will help it hold more contractile protein (actin and myosin).
To make more room for actin and myosin, mitochondrial density should be minimized to that necessary to maintain resting cell function.
Since fat can only be metabolized aerobically, high levels of fat cleaving enzymes in the cytosol are also unnecessary.
The capacity for anaerobic glycolysis should be high to allow brief but high capacity energy production without oxygen. The capacity for lactic acid production should be high.
What you should notice is that these two lists are exactly opposite. The optimal muscle for endurance CAN NEVER be maximally strong. And the muscle fiber that produces the most force CANNOT be optimally developed for endurance as well. The two conditions are mutually exclusive. This is one of the most important concepts to understand when designing a training program.
Three Points to Remember:
There are identifiable proteins in the muscle that contribute to its ability to produce high force at high rates (strength and Power).
There are also identifiable proteins and structural characteristics that confer high fatigue resistance (endurance).
There is no identifiable specific protein or structure that confers the quality "Strength-Endurance". When we train for strength-endurance, what we are really doing is training in a way that fails to stimulate either strength or endurance adaptations optimally. An example of this "best of neither worlds" approach is circuit training.
As a coach/athlete, your sucess begins with your ability to accurately understand the muscular demands of your sport. Then, a training program can be designed that will result in muscular development suited to the combination of strength and endurance that your sport requires. Here are two real world examples.
The above is an excerpt from the following site:
Study #4 compared doing strength+endurance training sequentially on the same day to doing strength+endurance training on alternate days. They found greater strength gains in the group that used alternate days. They did not compare either group to strength training without endurance training.
Study #2 measured "maximal knee-extension torque at a specific joint angle (0.52 rad below horizontal) for seven specific angular velocities (0, 0.84, 1.68, 2.81, 3.35, 4.19, and 5.03 rad X s-1)." They found that the combined strength+endurance negatively influenced the higher velocities (explosiveness), but not the lower ones.
Studies #1 and #3 were done nearly 25 years ago. They are too old to be online, so I cannot access them.
Last edited by aka23; 04-02-2004 at 07:26 PM.