Translation of the exercises mention in his notebook: Romanian Deadlift (90kg) / Lying Leg Curl (45kg) / Pendulum Squats (70kg) Is progressive overload just a scam and it actually all comes down to genetics?
>>77318765>Adjusted to perspective, feet are barely longer than a regular size penHe's also 5'4 so
>>77318768He's tall actually, 185cm
>>77318771In cat units of measure, sure
>>77318768>thinking such height approximations are anywhere near accuratePlease tell me you don't actually believe this shit. Please tell me you don't watch those dumbass internet "sleuths" with their utterly retarded height truth bullshit or that other retard that thinks he can find people from a single picture, blurts out some science-babble bullshit, and everyone just accepts it as real. Please tell me you're not that much of a fucking sheep!
>>77318781Lmao manlet cope
>>77318783Lol retard cope
I see muscular upper body, not legs. Why you are looking at his leg stats? did you fall for leg training?
>>77318781I've noticed autists struggle a lot with perspective
Here are other exercises he does: Bench press (90kg) / Incline bench press Smith Machine (60kg) / Dips (machine, 60kg) / Shoulder press (machine, 30kg) / Lateral raise (10kg). I don't understand how he's so good-looking while his lifts are very low?
>>77318809All we can see is his biceps and latsPost their routine
>>77318811https://x.com/seblouissant/mediaHis biceps and lats are not the only part of his body that look great and developed
>>77318813I dont have xitter post it or kick rocks
>>77318824
>>77318825RoidtrannyThreads over
>>77318765I'm muscular and I'm weak as fuck. Sometimes it's genetic, I guess. Maybe something to do with the way muscle fibers are made.
>>77318835How do you explain that? Do you do progressive overload? What was your starting point? I'm very curious about your case desu.
>>77318830That escalated quickly! Why do you think so? He doesn't look like a roidtranny to me.
>>77318809thats good performance bro i don't know what you are talking about
>>7731876570kg pendulum squats can be a lot, depending on the machine.I squat 3pl8, but when I do pendulum squats I'll just load 20-25kg.
This dude looks like he only trains his show muscle serious and seriously neglects back and legs, he also has manlet proportions and likely weighs 150lbs.Progressive overloads works for everybody for growing your muscles, you will never have a big chest benching 135. How aesthetic you appear depends on how your body is actually put together, and the angle of the light/how pumped you are for your photo.
>>77318847Roid fag buy an ad
>>77318965I have better numbers than his numbers, I'm shorter than him and I look DYEL
>>77318768This. He probably weighs like 150 but just looks big on camera because he's lean, the Tristyn Lee effect.I have a buddy who looks absolutely yoked out of his mind in all his Instagram shit but looks tiny when you see him in real life, and his 1rm bench is 185. When you're shredded the camera seems to add 30lbs
>>77318809Not awful numbers desu, that's better than most guys in the gym can do. But absolutely weak for his physique>>77318971This, especially if his form is good and he's doing full depth. I'll never understand the guys who quarter rep on machines... At least this guy is honest about his numbers unlike the gay fake weights using influencers all over social media>>77318978>>77318996These dudes are probably correct that he actually doesn't weigh a lot but manages to look huge on camera. Angles and lighting make you like 3x bigger when you got definition like that
>>77319003Not saying it's awful, it's not indeed, but there's a discrepancy between the numbers displayed and his physique, you cannot deny that
>>77318992i know for a fact that you are lying right now.
>>77319010I am not, I could show you my body and it's awful compared to his body.
>>77319011theres absolutely no way you are benching 220lbs for sets and not have a decent chest.
>>77319013I don't do bench press with the free bar, I do it on the Smith Machine. That's the only exercise where I can concede his numbers are decent. However, for everything else, I'm sorry but it's way below what one would expect based on his top-tier physique.
>>77319013He's probably fat. I have a 3pl8 bench but my chest hardly shows because I'm fucking 25% bf lol. That anon is probably in the same boat as me and needs to cut before his chest will really show
>>77319015you're just lying i'm sorry lulyou dont have have any of these lifts yourself
>>77319026As you can see, even pumped, my body is way below his body. >>77319019I'm 73kg 175cm, so I'm not fat and since I'm shorter than him, I should look muscular more easily, which is not the case as you can see
>>77319042That's not what i'm seeing, i see that you can't take a picture for shit, like wtf is this garbage setup. You are also carrying some fat.
>>77319056If you don't admit that my body is trash compared to his, then you're not being honest. The "garbage setup" is indeed true, but I don't want to cheat my pictures. The guy I've shown is cheating on many of his pictures, but even in "normal" ones he looks way better than me
>>77319060what?? xD
>>77319042Less flowers and more lifting, faggot.
>>77319068I'm already lifting more than him, that's what I don't understand. I was told progressive overload was the main driver of muscle hypertrophy!
>>77319097we have already determined that you are not lifting more and your photos looks like shit, that makes perfect sense actually.
>>77319105You just want to cling desperately to the myth of meritocracy in lifting and the idea that “the stronger you are, the more muscular you are”
>>77319106that's called causality man, its a fundamental law of the universe, you can't deny that, yes the more you get stronger, the more muscle you will build
>>77319146Yes but there are outliers: some people manage to get muscular without being that strong, and some people struggle to build muscles even though they are strong.
>>77319150>>77319106You have abysmal intellectual capacities
>>77319150show me some who can deadlift 650lbs and bench 400 that is not muscular please i beg you :)
>>77319169>>77319169I can show you people who lift heavier weights than the guy that I've shown and yet look less muscular: me. I'm not saying I deadlift 650lbs or bench 400, though.
>>77319146the correlation coefficient between strength and hypertrophy is only like 0.6-0.7. it's not a 1:1 thing>>77319042i compared a fair pic of that guy's physique in the link you posted to yours here. you have comparable arms, comparable traps, and comparable delts. he's not actually that big, he just has an admittedly great-looking chest for his strength level and a much better chest circumference to waist circumference ratio (which is largely a function of lats and bf%).
>>77319172>i comparedWhat do you mean? How did you compare? What's the tool, the metrics?
>>77319171no one believes this lmao you are actually mentally ill
>>77319175are you retarded? i compared the pictures with my eyes. that's what we're talking about, how people look.
>>77319177lolllll OP is fucking stupid i swear
>>77319177I thought you were asking AI or something
>>77319172>0.6-0.7.You realize how significant that is if we consider 0 or 0.1 to be the lowest possible coefficient aka someone at 0.1 ratio gets minimal hypertrophy from lifting x2 bw bench vs 0.5 same metric x2bw bench x 3 deadlift or whatever meme measure you came up with
>>77319172>the correlation coefficient between strength and hypertrophy is only like 0.6-0.7. it's not a 1:1 thingIt's even lower actually
>>77319183>AI>Elbow flexor trainingMan go fuck yourself you deserve to have every single finger of your slowly cut off and your kneecaps crushed before being thrown in the middle of the atlantic
>>77319189lmaooo i hate those science motherfuckers
>>77319194So what's your opinion? How to explain discrepancies between strength and muscle hypertrophy?
>>77319196theres NONE retard, there are only people who use different training methodology, to reach specific goals in their sports.
>>77319199If you can't agree with the fact that I have a much worse physique than the guy I posted, I can't save you, you're being insincere
>>77319205No i don't agree, however you should seek medical help because are likely suffering from body dismorphia.
>>77319183>>77319196here's an article on the matter if you'd actually like to somethinghttps://www.strongerbyscience.com/size-vs-strength/
>>77319194They trained them for 8 weeks and had them regularly deload to reach some convulted autistic 12 rep mark no matter what without progressively overloadingTo think this the "most cited" paper subject on this matter is eye opening. I was a skeptic now i cant take sport soience seriously at all anymore
>>77319196No one got it right in the thread, the answer is leverages. You simply have better bone lengths for certain positions and exercices which gives you a massive advantage and requires way less mucle mass to lift the same weight.
>>77319213Very interesting, thank you for sharing.
>>77319221I don't think so. The only thing I can mention is that I have a long torso, more specifically a long abdomen. Maybe this has an impact on how I look, on my ability to lift heavy?
>>77319244yes it is, obviously you described it yourself, some people are pretty muscular yet, their lifts aren't impressive at all, while another seemingly skinnier guy can lift more than the muscular guy, that's all leverages, its by far the most important factor for lifting heavy.
>>77319263But I don't really see how the guy I posted has particularly advantageous leverages?
>>77319265That's right he doesn't, compared to youthats why he ahs to be more muscular to lift less or the same as you.
>>77319267Is having a long torso a good thing to lift heavy? I didn't know that
>>77319271No i didn't say anything about that, i'd say its more limbs that matter.
>>77319275I have short limbs indeed, so it can explain why my numbers and higher than his numbers for the lower body.
>>77319279Well yeah its all about the ratios, someone who has longer arms/legs will struggle alot to lift heavy weights, consider yourself lucky!
>>77319285I don't know if I have long arms though, I know that my forearms are quite long compared to my humerus but I don't know if the overall length is long or short
>>77319290Well its easy to determine that by measuring your wingspan and compare it to your height, if your wingspan is longer that your height you have long arms, if its lower you have short arms.
>>77319290its called the APE index by the way(arm span / height)
>>77319060The problem is that you are the only one doing this so of course youre gonna look like shit compared to others that take propre photos
>>77319420Even if I was cheating on my pictures, I wouldn't look as muscular as him
>>77318809That's 90 for 10, followed by a few sets of 95 for 7 and 8. Basically high volume bench. That puts him probably at anywhere between a 130-140 bench press which isn't too bad. Guess his lower body sucks since he's not a powerlifter though.
>>77319448No it doesn't
>>77319042Your chest is very underdeveloped. I doubt your form / technique is good or you're lying.
>>77319456I don't know what to do with my chest... It is very underdeveloped indeed
>>77319487we can't see your chest at all on that photo...
>>77319218Every single study is like this too. Its like 4 subjects with no control. Or its some ridiculous protocol that isn't anything like what a normal person would think is useful but then they say the result means you now have to do 50 sets a week. And just over and over study after study not studying anything people actually care about or making any fucking sense at all. It is bizarre and gay and they should all be burned at the stake.
>>77318765If he scooped your wife's ass what would you do?
>>77320146So why is he saying that my chest is lagging behind?
>>77320260He's probably falling into a bias that you engineered yourself by taking a horrible photo with 0 shadows and hiding your chest.
>>77320283I don't want to cheat, you don't need to cheat on your pictures to look good if you really have a good physique
>>77320542Then why is everyone doing it?
>>77320596People who cheat on their pictures are usually muscular enough to look good even without cheating
hypertrophy != strength
>>77321650So what should one do to build muscles if progressive overload isn't the main strategy?
>>77321651and who said that
>>77321676>and who said that>>77321650
>>77321682@chatLGBT what does hypertrophy mean
The awful, gay truth of the matter is that there are too many variables to at play to be able to superficially look at someone and KNOW how strong they are. These include but aren't limited to: 1) overall size 2) muscle fiber type 3) neurological efficiencies 4) insertion points 5) body fat levels 6) limb lengths 7) limb proportions to each other 8) fatigue/vigilance 9) hormonal state 10) expertise in the lift demonstrated 11) nutritional/hydration status 12) age 13) height, size and weight 14) vascularity 15) injuries, both chronic or acute Not all of these factors, and usually not too many, can be known just by looking at someone. I myself have witnessed many well formed, muscular looking young men at the gym seem to be piss weak, but they look waaaay better than my old ass, even though I am extremely strong, reasonably lean but old. I have also been told, about a decade ago before I built most of my muscular size, that I was weaker than I looked (I am 6'5" and was only about 220 back then) - they expected me to be stronger).So, although I would expect there to be some sort of rough correlation between muscularity and size, I am also not surprised that the data shows a relatively low level of correlation.
>>77318809Because he’s consistent and does the exercises with good form. If you can get growth and a quality physique doing that then why go heavy just so you can force something through with shite form?>but I can deadlift 280kg you fucking glass back bitch I’m STRONG!Ok cool but you have the physique of a half full bin liner and you don’t know how to train, recover or workI can bench press far, far more than I work with. If you’ve got 80-100kg on the bar as WORKING sets then you are strong
>>77322819How would you know that he is consistent and performs with good form?
>>77318765His legs are not remarkable so idk what to tell you also if he's on gear too that shit is naturally anabolic so it doesn't take that much to stimulate growth Romanian deads mostly train the fucking hamstrings and glutes so idk what the hell ur even saying here
>>77322883Because he looks balanced, fit and has a decent physique. Even his handwriting and laying out of what he's trained means he's tracking exercises and progress properly, and if he's doing that right he's overwhelmingly likely to be exercising with decent formIt's like hiring someone to do a job. If they do the basics and fundamentals well then they are near enough guaranteed to do the rest of the stuff right. Conversely, if you hire someone who is obsessed with irrelevant small details and who else is doing what then it probably isn't going to go well
>>77323117I'm just saying you are totally falling into a biased judgment here, you are judging his actions which you 0 proof of, in a good light just because he looks good but that doesn't mean he is doing things correctly with 0 mistakes, it just means he has good genetics.
>>77323133>I'm just saying you are totally falling into a biased judgment here>it just means he has good geneticsCan you see his genetics you triple nigger?
>>77323141can you see he did things right?? do you his exercice executions? or did you just made that up completely
>>77323152Yes because he looks good and you don't. He looks as if he trains and disciplines himself, which you cannot do. You can, accurately, get an understanding of what someone is and isn't doing from their behaviour. I can guarantee that from your behaviour that you are small, with a shit physique and no strength. I would also put lots of money on you being an Indian
>>77323273But do you see how this is your brain tricking you into coming to that conclusion when you have no idea? this guy could be performing the worst form, chose a retarded program and yet still look good, do you understand that? I don't think you realize that your judgment implies that anyone that is not looking good MUST be doing things wrong.And this is absolutely false, looking good and muscular is mainly genetics
OP here, he posted a new thing on his Instagram. How can you say that he's NOT muscular!! https://www.instagram.com/reel/DZXsOK2soUp/?igsh=MXZ0aHFrOWR4azRpYw==
>>77323273Reasoning fallacy here, someone looking good doesn't mean they did things optimally. On the other side of the coin, someone looking bad doesn't mean their training is awful. It's basically neglecting the impact of genetics, individual differences in responses to hypertrophy, athletic background, etc.
>>77320154>Every single study is like this too. Its like 4 subjects with no control. Or its some ridiculous protocol that isn't anything like what a normal person would think is useful /fit/ is the only place on 4chan that discusses scientific papers, and this is the reason why.
>>77318765Gear
>>77318765I have seen a lot of guys who were fairly muscular but used baby weight. I even went there myself a few times. It isn't that they are "weak" but to use the old saying, they are a "different kind of strong", meaning they do have muscular endurance that can be pretty crazy. The muscular bean pole does not have a lot of maximal force output but is not without merit. Those are the guys running circles around people in physical jobs.
>>77323337Great chest but he’s obese so it’s not surprising he looks big
>>77318765He doesn't look that big.
>>77324975Well, if he's still muscular behind his fat it means he built these muscles. With baby weights. How??
>>77318765Hypertrophy and enhancing drugs
>>77325079High volume with 200lbs on a barbell bench is nothing to scoff at, he’s at a higher bodyfat so it’s no very impressive granted, but it’s much enough for gaining some size with volume and good exercise selection, which he does when in comes to chest training, however he will have weak shoulders
>>77325095So he's just maxxing out volume instead of chasing intensity. I thought progressive overload was the main (and only?) driver of muscle hypertrophy.
>>77325129I don’t know who you’re quoting and I don’t care, training a lot with intensity makes gains, volume is King
>>77325151What should one do to maximise muscle hypertrophy? That's my main question, because I've always thought one had to do sets close to failure but with a weight that his heavy enough to be challenging
>>77322811yeah, at my uni gym i bench more than the majority of guys, i can do 120 kilo for 3 reps. But since i am tall like you and even skinnier at like 88 kilo, i look borderline skeleton esque. There is a bald guy a head shorter than me that looks absolutely jacked yet is much weaker than me, we work out together often. and every time he is constantly commenting "how the fuck can you lift that" and shit. I guess i will look bigger when i bench 130 maybe. I havent really seen much increase in size going from a 100 kilo bench to a 120 kilo bench. But then again i mever bulked, since i have trouble eating lots of food.
>>77318765He's not doing pussy crushing, unless it's rape
>>77325303So how do you explain your case versus his case. How did you build your strength? Isn't an increase in strength suppose to lead to muscle hypertrophy (considering you're training in hypetrophy sets, between 8 and 15 reps per set)?
>>77325308well i dunno, i do an upper lower split, with heavier sets with lower reps on the first upper day, and hypertgrophy lighter sets on the second upper day same for lower days.he does some sort of bro split program, seems random to me. but keep in mind that he is a jead shorter than me and is 6 kilo heavier than me. If you are OP, i think both of us have the similar problem of not eating enough. Since the lifts within this intermediate range can increase from muscle hypertophy, yes, but also mostly from training your nervous system. Maybe he is eating more than you, and therefore doesnt have the constraint on building muscle that you do, with lower calories? That's my headcanon
>>77322811>I myself have witnessed many well formed, muscular looking young men at the gym seem to be piss weak, but they look waaaay better than my old assYeah but how is that possible? The main goal when you start lifting, the main thing everyone tells you is to chase progressive overload (with good form and with sets between 8 and 15 reps, of course) to create muscles. I'm not saying that the guy that I'm showing in the initial picture of this thread hasn't improved his lifts: of course, he made progress, he didn't start with 90kg on his bench. However, there's still a discrepancy between how good he looks and his numbers. You wouldn't expect someone with his numbers to look so good, so "developed". On the other hand, some people lift way heavier than him and aren't as developed as him. How can one reconcile this paradox?
>>77318765>GYM'S HARKWhat's a hark?
>>77325325Harkonnen
>>77325316I also have this problem of struggling to eat enough, yeah. However, I'm not that light either. I'm 176cm 74kg. Many people look way better than me at lower weight (for a similar height). It's not as if I were very skinny.
>>77325129Well progressive overload isn't just more weight on the bar yes that is the goal but it can take multiple sessions to A: even get another rep or even just to straighten out and make your last rep you can do a lot less sloppy, so like after u hit ten with solid form you move up weight So variables like higher intensity can also be a lever u push for more hypertrophy, high intensity one to two real working sets to failure or 1rir, double progression hit ten reps with clean form and move up weight.
>>77324906>a million probes to diagnose what the eye can see 200 yards away
>>77325595So what should I do if I struggle to build muscles although I have good numbers on my lifts?
>>77319150Of course there are outliers - there always will be. The mistake you're making is assuming that YOU are the outlier and becoming demoralized by that belief. Even if it happens to be true, the answer to your problems is to KEEP LIFTING. Nobody cares if you had to work slightly harder than the next guy to do it - if you are consistent and progressively overload your aesthetics will eventually catch up to your strength.
>>77318768>Adjusted to perspective, my thumb is about as large as the sun
>>77325743Don't worry, keeping lifting is what I'm doing currently. I don't see my aesthetics catching up to my strength though, lol.
>>77325747Do you know what "adjusted" means, sankpreet ?
>>77325765Do you know what the average pen size is nigglet?Do you think his foot is around the average pen size, 13cm-15cm,which corresponds to an EU size 23 shoe and worn by toddlers?Do you seriously believe he is about a meter tall and wears size 23 shoes you absolute retard?
They train for aesthetics not strength. Just do barbell compound lifts, pull ups, and dips to be strong.
>>77325777>Manlet meltyLmao !
>>77325799I'm already training for aesthetics, not strength
>>77325751I believe in you anon. Make sure you believe in you too
