Page 1 of 1
Good news from home...
Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:54 pm
I just found out that my cousin, who will be my motivator and personal trainer when I get back to Tasmania, won the IFBB under 90kg Mr Tasmania. It's a small comp but he did pretty well!
Not that I want to be a body builder but hey, if you can get a free PT who is pretty big then why not right? He also used a Starting Strength variation when starting out so that's what he's going to be taking me through!
Oh he also Power Lifts so he's can't a complete poser, right?
Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 3:02 pm
John, back in the day (prior to around 1970), the track and field weight throwers, O lifters the newly formed PLr's, and bodybuilders all pretty much trained the same for at least part of the year, focusing on trength with basic compound exercises and lifts. it would be like that until a month or two or three before a specific event that they would "specialize", so yes, the lifter and throwers were also the "posers".
Re: Good news from home...
Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 7:42 pm
Oh he also Power Lifts so he's can't a complete poser, right?
That is hilarious. Congrats to your cousin.
Tim - So John's cousin seems to be doing well with the old school formula, what caused people to start to vary from this? (sorry if this is a hyjack)
Posted: Mon Oct 06, 2008 8:32 pm
I don't consider this a hijack, it seems to be about strength and mirror being compatible. Up until the mid 60's, or a bit later (I was in high school back then, and my memory leaves a bit to be desired in time lines), Hoffman and York BC were the controlling factions with the AAU, and their thing was get strong first, then specialize. Then, around that time frame, Joe and Ben Weider came on the scene, and promoted bodybuilding, with their magazines and supplements. Then the fitness boom came up, and people started following the Weiders, along with a lot of other contributers, including Dr. Ken Cooper, basically the founder of the "Aerobics Movement", and the split was created. Ben and Joe then created the NPC and IFBB, which tailore to mirror only contests for bodybuilding. Enough on the bodybuilding split.
In the late 1960's, the clean and press, the strength movement, was eliminated from the Olympic lifting program. Up until that happened, O lifters did a lot of work on upper body push. With that gone, it more or less became upper body stabilization, and lower body (and back) strength and power. Around the same time, mid 60's, Power lifting became a recognized sport, and you had a shift into those that trained primarily for Squat, Dead, and BP. I can't knock them. It's less technical, and you can build much better overall strength that way.
Just a brief overview of my thoughts on the whole split thing. If you want more details, I'll give them, but I think I laid out way the sports went in different directions. IMHO, bodybuilding and PL are very compatible, and those of both sports would do well to engage in both over the course of several cycles.
Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2008 3:54 am
As the OP, I don't feel there was a Hijack at all!
I am now very interested in the past of fitness after reading this though!
As a former subscriber to Muscle and Fitness (it was a present from my Mum when I told her I bought an expensive gym membership!) and getting into how much the Weider Brothers achieved almost god like status in the body building fraternity by endorsing the right athletes at the right time! Big Arnnie, for one, was one of their 'boys' for most of his career which turned them into household names across the world instead of just the USA!
As for the other fraternities, the OL's and PL's, I want to know more now so I'm gonna get researching when I get the chance!
It's amazing where the world is now in the health and fitness industry in that the popular ideaology is not really the most affective, but the best advertised. I guess the more people don't see results the more money they spend trying to achieve their ultimate goal. If everyone could do a quick google search, say "I'm a mesomorph and want to lose weight and tone up" and all of a sudden they had a program that would get them in great shape in 2 years with 3 a week work outs then 2 a week maintenance workouts, then gyms would go broke, right? They need joe average to keep plugging away, week after week, month after month, year after year and getting slow results to boost their income to pay for all those ROM restricting machines they buy! Whilst the BB monsters like Ronnie Coleman (monster insize, not personality! I met him once in Hobart and he's a really nice guy) hit the Squats, Dead Lifts and BP to build overall strength first then get to the split workouts pre-comp but the magazines only publish their definition work outs and tell you that's how they got where they are, it's basically a big fat lie!
Anyway, what a stupid rant that was! lol
Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2008 4:38 am
I thought I would hop on the band wagon.
I love hearing about 'back in day'. And it really makes me angry now, when someone in the gym - normally a trainer - will say, "hey, you're looking bigger these days? So much for only training for strength!". YOu know, as if when people can see me I do my low rep DL's, squats etc, but when no one's looking I sneak away and get some 'bodybuilding' sets in! Why-aye-otta
It genuinely confuses them when you say, "if you get stronger, you'll get bigger". And they'll say, "but.... but... you won't get bigger if you train low reps all the time".
Firstly, why not? Secondly, I, and anyone else who only trains for strength does NOT only train at lower reps. Jeeeeeeeeees.
It's amazing where the world is now in the health and fitness industry in that the popular ideaology is not really the most affective, but the best advertised. I guess the more people don't see results the more money they spend trying to achieve their ultimate goal. If everyone could do a quick google search, say "I'm a mesomorph and want to lose weight and tone up" and all of a sudden they had a program that would get them in great shape in 2 years with 3 a week work outs then 2 a week maintenance workouts, then gyms would go broke, right?
I'm not sure if they would go broke. I mean, training is a long term thing. Most lifters raise the bar as they get closer to their target as well - so you're most likely always chasing something.
I do think that the "fitness industry" just tells people exactly what they want to hear, which is essentially, "getting in shape is easy". You know, lifting fast is bad, lifting full ROM is bad, using mostly free weights is more dangerous than the idoit proof machines. Don't hold you're breath during lifting. Don't let you're heart rate go above * whatever *. Stand in a quarter squat hold on a vibrating platform and you're essentially doing an intense full body work out.. etc etc
Or the latest one i'm seeing - "hey, if you want to bulk up, spend 20-30 minutes messing around on an agility ladder" (one of the funniest things i've seen recently - new trainer with a new toy).
If people trained hard they would see results and I believe that would make it enjoyable. The problem is the stigma - if a middle aged 'mom of 3' came into the gym and there's a big free weights area and it's actually getting used by lot's of people, they will probably be put off by it. God forbid there's puffs of chalk floating around as well. So maybe if everyone trained properly it would have a knock on effect and put potentially new members off from joining.
Of course, the majority of paying members don't actually go to the gym, January excluded. I've been told this by a few gym managers and loads of trainers. I could believe it as well.
Posted: Wed Oct 08, 2008 4:09 am
Yep. I call them ressies. Because they do the new years resolution and train during January making the gym very crowded. But come February and there isn't a single one around anymore.
Posted: Wed Oct 08, 2008 9:49 pm
It's amazing where the world is now in the health and fitness industry in that the popular ideaology is not really the most affective,
I figured Tim was going to say the split was aided by doctors and scientist with their heads up their a$$, and came up with all these stupid machines that take up all the space I could use for fun stuff…
Rather than the 3 split because of head up a$$, heads went up a$$ because of the split I guess.
KPj wrote: The problem is the stigma - if a middle aged 'mom of 3' came into the gym and there's a big free weights area and it's actually getting used by lot's of people, they will probably be put off by it.
If they only took the time to learn the truth, rather than think they will turn into Arnold from touching a 5lb free weight, and we are all Juice Junkies with Roid Rage, they might get out of the place what they came there for. (assuming they are motivated to get the other variables in order also.)