I was on /fit/ 15 years ago, they told me to eat oats and train Stronglifts 5x5. I trained and my biceps and lateral deltoids grow by 0%. It was also 15 squat sets per week.Never listen to /fit/0 sets of biceps0 sets of lateral deltoids15 sets of squats1 set of deadlift
>>76706752cool story bro
What does /fit/ shill these days? Is it as harmful?
starting strength is bad
>>76706827Twice a week full body
Wow haven't heard this hot take a million times.
>>76707217What kind of full body, give example of exercises for both days.
>>76708056Push ups / benchPull ups / rowBiceps curlTriceps extensionLateral raisesSquatsPlanksCalf raisesWrist curlsNeck curls
>>76708066No deadlifts? OHP?
>>76708066>10 lifts in one sessionsure, maybe when you are ultra dyel and use the bar + 25's at most
>>76706752Lmao literally everyone added arm workHow far did you get before you realized your arms weren't growing?Did you not think to add it?>>76707028Kek
>>76708934/Fit/ doesn't actually lift anymore All those lifts are on machines
>>76706752How big were your legs though?
it never was a bodybuilding program. literally says it in the name its a strength program.
>>76708066This is impossible, it will take 2-3 hours unless you make one set of every exercise.>>76709193>Lmao literally everyone added arm workI didn't. /fit/ didn't tell to add. Also, why doesn't program have arm exercises.>How far did you get before you realized your arms weren't growing?6 months. My bicep was the same size after 6 months. The triceps did grow though.>Did you not think to add it?No, because idiots and /fit/ said that barbell rows will grow your biceps. No, they don't. Pull ups could, but meme rows don't. But fit was against pull ups because they are not barbell.>>76709210I don't remember but I squatted almost double body weight.>>76709237I wasn't a bodybuilder. Arm strength is also strength. All it trained is squats. It was unbalanced even in the legs, you did 15 sets of squats but only 1.5 set of deadlift, so your hamstrings had 10 times less impulse to grow than quads.
>>76709210small
>>76706752Starting Strength (and similar programs like Stronglifts 5x5) is great as a true training novice because, if you do the program as written and truly understand the traing principles espoused, it sets the ground work for any lifting or traing goal, including bodybuilding.The novice linear progression program builds up general strength in the whole body. Maybe you will begin to look more muscular (some do) or maybe you wont (some dont, right away). But hopefully you will get a lot stronger. Being a fat piece of shit is another issue altogether. Starting Strength is NOT a diet program. Its on YOU to follow a eating and diet plan that allows you to grow, rest, recover and not become a fat piece of shit. Dont blame SS if you get fat. The barbells didnt make you fat. Your fork did.After you stall out on the novice linear progression, one needs to transition into other more specific training programs, adding accessory exercises (like arms, calfs and shoulders) as needed. Now that youre a stronger person, who can deadlift 365 and squat 275 and bench 225 you can grasp some dumbells, brace your body, focus and squeeze to do your accessory movements. Not just swing them around. Progress theses exercises like you did your squat. Maybe you will do bicep curls for 5 sets of 10-15 reps, not three sets of 5, but the principles will apply. Do the work, increase the weight (or sets or reps) and over months or years your body should grow. Keep doing the big barbell lifts.Bodybuilding would have us believe that we can really make little tiny parts of our body grow. Not really. You cant pinpoint growth. As you become bigger and more muscular, smaller parts (shoulders, biceps, calfs) will also grow if you're stressing them with accessory lifts. But you cant just lift the accessories and expect significant growth ESPECIALLY if you're someone below average on the genetics bell curve (which half of us are).
>>76710734These programs are bad no matter how long your post will be.I designed my own program now and it's 10 times better.
>>76710734It is far too squat intensive. It should be called Starting Squats. Ultimately, it all comes down to what it is you want to achieve. The “mechanics” covered in SS are *very* good but the programme itself is too focused on the lower body. You could follow it to the letter with first rate nutrition and rest and you would grow disproportionately strong in your lower body and have virtually nothing to show for it elsewhereThat, and the authority in which it is written puts a lot of people off
>>76710734>you cant just lift the accessories and expect significant growthAm I retarded or does this make zero sense? You’re telling me, for example, I can’t get significant bicep growth from doing curls unless I’ve already gotten strong enough to bench two plates?
>>76711974No what he's telling you is that you can't get significant bicep growth until you squat 3 plates. What, that doesn't make sense? Well YNDTP.
>>76710734>You cant pinpoint growthMight be the most retarded thing ever said on /fit
>>76710734>Bodybuilding would have us believe that we can really make little tiny parts of our body grow. Not really. You cant pinpoint growth. As you become bigger and more muscular, smaller parts (shoulders, biceps, calfs) will also grow if you're stressing them with accessory lifts. But you cant just lift the accessories and expect significant growth ESPECIALLY if you're someone below average on the genetics bell curve (which half of us are).completely wrong btw
Sharting stength.
yes
