getting my lilttle brother into bodybuilding

Ask or answer questions, discuss and express your views

Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, parth, stuward

Immortal
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 298
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 2010 5:59 pm

Post by Immortal » Tue Mar 01, 2011 12:02 am

starting strength actually sounds good .it seems like hes already got basic lifts down. I havent seen him perform a dead lift or a squat in awhile due to the fact that on most days I lift in a separate gym from him. If I see him doing both dead lift and squat with good form, Ill see if hell be willing to grind out some tough starting strength stuff. I believe the biggest problem is making him stay diciplined and not stray off from his efforts


nygmen
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 1802
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:51 pm
Location: Mass, USA

Post by nygmen » Tue Mar 01, 2011 7:40 am

Immortal wrote:starting strength actually sounds good
I give up, I'm done...

It's like you only hear what you want to hear.

And my point about you being to inexperienced to be in charge of anyone's training for any amount of time still stands, particularly a program with heavy (relative) spinal loading 3 days a week and power cleans.

nygmen
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 1802
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:51 pm
Location: Mass, USA

Post by nygmen » Tue Mar 01, 2011 7:48 am

KPj wrote:

Throw in the fact that it takes several years to build a decent BB physique then, I also can't help but think, "what's the hurry?".
Right, but what is the point of waiting until you hit some arbitrary strength level before you start working on the exact things that make you look like you want to look?

I mean, 3-4 sets of lateral raises twice a week, progressively getting stronger isn't going to stop you from putting 200lbs on your squat in 2 years. But what it is going to do is give your lateral heads a reason and some stimulus to grow in proportion to everything else.

I think people see a bunch of blockheads at the gym that only do curls and raises and instantly blame the exercise for their lack of progress. When in realty it is the trainee not the lift that is to blame.

As with anything, your program should be built around the big compounds, but the addition of some pretty boy stuff at the end, that you focus on getting stronger on also, is only going to help, and isn't that taxing.

I bolded a particular part that is very important, and I feel a lot of people miss. You have to get stronger on your curls and raises too. You have to attack them with the same (relative) intensity you do deads, otherwise you'll get no where.

(This is all assuming someone is eating enough to grow)

robertscott
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 4424
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:20 pm

Post by robertscott » Tue Mar 01, 2011 9:31 am

Eric mate I wish I'd spoken to you when I first started lifting. I would have made a hell of a lot more progress a damn sight quicker

wilburburns
Member
Member
Posts: 625
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2008 12:16 pm
Location: Kentucky, USA
Contact:

Post by wilburburns » Tue Mar 01, 2011 9:39 am

nygmen wrote:
KPj wrote:

Throw in the fact that it takes several years to build a decent BB physique then, I also can't help but think, "what's the hurry?".
Right, but what is the point of waiting until you hit some arbitrary strength level before you start working on the exact things that make you look like you want to look?

I mean, 3-4 sets of lateral raises twice a week, progressively getting stronger isn't going to stop you from putting 200lbs on your squat in 2 years. But what it is going to do is give your lateral heads a reason and some stimulus to grow in proportion to everything else.

I think people see a bunch of blockheads at the gym that only do curls and raises and instantly blame the exercise for their lack of progress. When in realty it is the trainee not the lift that is to blame.

As with anything, your program should be built around the big compounds, but the addition of some pretty boy stuff at the end, that you focus on getting stronger on also, is only going to help, and isn't that taxing.

I bolded a particular part that is very important, and I feel a lot of people miss. You have to get stronger on your curls and raises too. You have to attack them with the same (relative) intensity you do deads, otherwise you'll get no where.

(This is all assuming someone is eating enough to grow)
Are you really saying that the MONTH immortal would be training his brother will give him some massive inbalances? If so, even Rippetoe states that a few "Curls for the Girls" are ok after the Big lifts are done for the day.

I may be totally crazy, but I see SS as a good teaching point. Teaches (by repetition) the big lifts, and how to work hard. If he can't put in the work required of SS, he'll never be able to put in the work required to become a BB'er.

Cliff


KPj
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 3482
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 5:49 am

Post by KPj » Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:57 am

nygmen wrote: Right, but what is the point of waiting until you hit some arbitrary strength level before you start working on the exact things that make you look like you want to look?
I wasn't implying you wait until you hit some random numbers on compound lifts. It was more - get bigger all over and see what grows well and what doesn't. I also don't mean to do this for years until you end up with major (physique) imbalances.
nygmen wrote: I mean, 3-4 sets of lateral raises twice a week, progressively getting stronger isn't going to stop you from putting 200lbs on your squat in 2 years. But what it is going to do is give your lateral heads a reason and some stimulus to grow in proportion to everything else.
I definitely agree with this. I'm just brainstorming, really, wondering if there's a line and if so where do you draw it. I don't see any issue with doing some curls or lateral raises or whatever (and especially training them like you recommend). However why not do the same for traps, calves, forearms, tris, hamstrings or whatever else? My logic is - how does a beginner know what is going to be stubborn and what isn't without first starting with a stripped down, basic, SS-style approach.
nygmen wrote: I think people see a bunch of blockheads at the gym that only do curls and raises and instantly blame the exercise for their lack of progress. When in realty it is the trainee not the lift that is to blame.
I think that too, and have been guilty of it myself. Although not so much blaming the exercise but the programming.

I'm really not a SS fanatic, btw, but these discussions always seem to end up as SS vs Compounds plus a few isolation exercises. I don't think the difference in opinion is very much at all.

FWIW i've used programs very similar to SS for beginners and thrown other stuff in on top of it. Not for BB purposes but for other reasons. I'm not opposed to throwing in some extra work, i'm just trying to understand the logic here in terms of BB'ing for the purpose of learning. Both view points here can seem as extreme as each other. One one side here you have the opinion that doing a curl will turn you into the typical commercial gym idiot. But on the other you have the opinion that it's catastrophic to your physique if you don't do a curl or lateral raise in your first ~6 months of lifting. The more I think about it and discuss it the closer I get to thinking, "it really doesn't matter!". If you are true to your beginner phase and burst your a$$ in the gym whilst eating enough, then it shouldn't last long long to make a difference to your long term physique goals anyway.....

KPj

pdellorto
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 5252
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 8:43 am
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Post by pdellorto » Tue Mar 01, 2011 3:58 pm

I'm basically with KPj on this one - I don't see what doing a single long-ish (2-3 months?) cycle of the SS basic program will do in terms of long-term damage to your bodybuilding chances. Sure, it's not designed for a balanced and symmetrically attractive physique, but it's not a bad way to start. Immortal's brother is going to get actual BB coaching, so why not just say, screw it, get as strong as I can until then? How much damage do you think gets done not worrying about the isolation lifts, really? I'm not saying don't do them, and I don't want to get hung up on analogies to other sports skills. I just don't see it.

I'm curious, though - based on your own experience, what would a good beginner program for a would-be bodybuilder be? I think if we all have one laid out on the forum in a post we could point out our specific areas of agreement or disagreement. I'd bet it won't be that different, really . . .

User avatar
TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
In Memoriam: TimD
Posts: 3129
Joined: Mon Dec 19, 2005 8:04 am
Location: Va Beach, Va

Post by TimD » Tue Mar 01, 2011 5:00 pm

pdellorto wrote:I'm curious, though - based on your own experience, what would a good beginner program for a would-be bodybuilder be? I think if we all have one laid out on the forum in a post we could point out our specific areas of agreement or disagreement. I'd bet it won't be that different, really . . .
Not KPJ, but Tim here. I'm old school, and would recommend something along the lines of the old York courses or some of the beginner stuff from Peary Raders old Iron Man, for a BB aspect. Basically, what they amounted to were full body compounds, done for a warm up or two, then 1 or 2 work sets. After about a month, you put up two full body's, same sets/reps, around 6-10. The idea was to get a variety of good moves done, get the motor pathways going, and just ease into things. These were very similar to what I put up in the stickies for beginners interested in BB/Physical fitnessAbout 7 or 8 exercises.

Now, SS, Starr's stuff, Askem's stuff basically built around the big 3, Push, pull and squat, are just fine for a beginner too, it's just geared more to a strength oriented trainee. Either is good, and they really aren't that different.
Tim

nygmen
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 1802
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:51 pm
Location: Mass, USA

Post by nygmen » Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:15 am

robertscott wrote:Eric mate I wish I'd spoken to you when I first started lifting. I would have made a hell of a lot more progress a damn sight quicker
Ha, thanks man.

I try to make sense at least 75% of the time.

nygmen
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 1802
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:51 pm
Location: Mass, USA

Post by nygmen » Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:35 am

wilburburns wrote:
Are you really saying that the MONTH immortal would be training his brother will give him some massive inbalances? If so, even Rippetoe states that a few "Curls for the Girls" are ok after the Big lifts are done for the day.

I'm speaking in general terms at this point, but you raise two interesting points.

One being, I don't think anyone at his stage should be training anyone else. Let alone loading his spine with back squats 3 days a week.

Second. Look at your last sentence. The attitude of "I'll do em if I have time" or "they aren't important, so if I toss em in at the end things will be alright.". Is the major imbalances that can be instilled in the month he is training him.

That is the damage a month of SS worship can do.
I may be totally crazy, but I see SS as a good teaching point
I agree if your training for sport or powerlifting. But if you are training for any sort of aesthetic reason, forget it. You will have a blocky mid second, lagging shoulders, visible clavicles, stick arms and a giant ass... Forget about back width, V taper or any back development for that matter other than your erectors and some traps.

Someone mentioned it is meant for a short period of time, and I hope most people lifting for aesthetics figure that out quickly.
Teaches (by repetition) the big lifts, and how to work hard.
So does any BB split. You seem to be falling into the trap of "blame the split/lift, not the person".


Look, at the end of the day the routine someone does is largely irrelevant as long as it isn't creating imbalances and weak spots. Diet and Intensity, desire and effort, and above all else consistency are going to determine progress more than split or routine.

That being said, from a BB'ing perspective, SS builds in weakspots and imbalances both mentally and physically.

nygmen
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 1802
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:51 pm
Location: Mass, USA

Post by nygmen » Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:41 am

pdellorto wrote: Sure, it's not designed for a balanced and symmetrically attractive physique, but it's not a bad way to start.
This is where I get lost in the weeds on this...

You admit it is the wrong thing for BB'ing goals, but somehow it's still a good place for someone with those goals start? I don't get it...

I understand the hesitation with analogies, but they make sense logically. I mean if you want to be a plumber you go to plumbing classes and work with a master plumber. If you want to be an electrician you go to electric class and work with a master electrician. SO to me, you sentence above is like saying "You want to be a plumber? Go work with a master electrician to start, it teaches you the fundamentals."

Maybe I'm just being a blockhead myself?

nygmen
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 1802
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:51 pm
Location: Mass, USA

Post by nygmen » Wed Mar 02, 2011 7:42 am

KPj wrote:. I don't think the difference in opinion is very much at all.
Nah, not really at all. Like was said, if we each wrote out a program I'm sure it would be very similar in general.

But then again we've beat this dead horse so many times now, we've all learned enough to see the bigger picture, lol.

pdellorto
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 5252
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 8:43 am
Location: New Jersey
Contact:

Post by pdellorto » Wed Mar 02, 2011 8:40 am

nygmen wrote:
pdellorto wrote: Sure, it's not designed for a balanced and symmetrically attractive physique, but it's not a bad way to start. [/quote="pdellorto"]

This is where I get lost in the weeds on this...

You admit it is the wrong thing for BB'ing goals, but somehow it's still a good place for someone with those goals start? I don't get it...
I don't think it's designed to get you a balanced and symmetrically attractive physique, but to get you stronger and bigger. BBing would seem to me to work out well if you start out by getting stronger and bigger.

nygmen wrote: I understand the hesitation with analogies, but they make sense logically. I mean if you want to be a plumber you go to plumbing classes and work with a master plumber. If you want to be an electrician you go to electric class and work with a master electrician. SO to me, you sentence above is like saying "You want to be a plumber? Go work with a master electrician to start, it teaches you the fundamentals."
I don't like the analogies because they aren't really the point. Want to be a plumber? You learn from a master plumber, sure, but you don't start out doing the high-skill work. You carry stuff, gopher stuff, hand over the wrenches, etc. Want to be a fighter? I start you out with the very basics. You learn guard and work the hell out of that before I teach you how to transition from guard into a sweep into an arm bar and how to turn that into a compression when the person counters. You aren't there yet, and all the work on the fancy stuff is wasted because you don't have the basics to build on.

To me, the BBing fundamentals would be "big and strong" and SS would be a good way to get there. So would a number of others. Even a routine like this one:

http://www.ironmanmagazine.com/index.cf ... le&go2=978

(from the beginner's routines sticky) is based on 3x a week spinal loading with reasonably heavy weights for a good amount of volume. Yeah, it has isolation lifts. So does Westside for Skinny Bastards I and III and they're both aimed at athletes, yet they demonstrably make people bigger.

Honestly, if someone came to me and said "I want to bodybuild, help me" I'd start them on something like SS or WS4SB and just make sure they got as strong as possible while we tossed in higher-rep sets for more hypertrophy and made sure they ate a lot. I'd have them worry about lacking a V-taper and needing to cut down and work up their lateral deltoids and calves until we had something to cut down. I'd suggest they go find a real bodybuilding coach, too, but that's how I'd start them. Get bigger and stronger ASAP and worry about the details as they go. I'd worry a lot less about conditioning and I'd almost totally ignore stuff like improving his power-generation. But basically, it would be that kind of approach.

You could bring up another plumber analogy here, but I'm not sure it helps. I'm not saying "You want to be a bodybuilder? Don't train like one." I'm saying that to me, the fundamental base you want to work on is the "get big and strong" one, and then modify it from there. I wouldn't pursue specific strength numbers, just go until easy linear gains were gone and then take it from there with something else.

I just don't see the damage you are postulating happening. As worst, you're potentially wasting a bit of time, but I don't think getting stronger and bigger is going to be a time-waster. I also don't think you lock in imbalances unless you continue to train for strength without balancing it out with things that reach your other goals.

IMO, anyway. My experience is limited here, which is why I'm pursuing this. I want to know what the best approach is if I get someone like this.

robertscott
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Deific Wizard of Sagacity
Posts: 4424
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 7:20 pm

Post by robertscott » Wed Mar 02, 2011 1:05 pm

This thread has gotten very interesting. What routine then would we all prescribe a beginner lifting for th sake of his physique?

Personally I'd go with WS4SB, the classic variation

http://www.defrancostraining.com/articl ... part1.html

I know it's more for athletes but I still think it works great for pretty much anyone. Gets you big and strong but doesn't neglect any movement or muscle group... except maybe calves but who cares about them? Stubborn little assholes at the bottom of my leg that I can't make grow.

jps
Associate Member
Associate Member
Posts: 407
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 2:21 pm
Location: central Florida

Post by jps » Wed Mar 02, 2011 6:15 pm

robertscott wrote: except maybe calves but who cares about them? Stubborn little assholes at the bottom of my leg that I can't make grow.
LOL.....funniest thing I've read in a while!


Post Reply