lmfao Protein is the start to steroids You say you hate fighters that have a good knowledge of how to maximise their nutrition which enhances sports performance? Such strong ignorance in this post its unreal. I take it you hate every olympic athlete and pretty much most of the boxing community? You seem very jaded in to what protein shakes will do for you, some research is in need i think. My protein powder is like gold dust to me and cheap also - only £27 for 5kg from myprotein. Its your own fault if you get conned into buying from GNC at £35 a tub for 2kg of muscletech products etc. Most competing athletes that i know personally (boxers and bodybuilders) buy from bulk sources, not high street chains.
I don't HATE fighters or their knowledge, read more carefully, i hate the whole process they go through with the supplements buying/mixing/walking around with shakers/spending lots of money/not seeing results. Been there, done that. AND i didn't say protein is the start to steroids, BUT 80% of fighters i know, don't use just protein, they throw in creatine, speed boosters, trans x, mass gainers and whatever other crap they find. I don't think any less of those fighters, i still train with them and consider them normal people. I'm saying i won't use any of that if i don't have to. As i'm not a top notch fighter, but a beginner, i don't see the need to spend that amount of money so i could speed up my recovery rate by 2%. And to increase that recovery rate i'd have to increase the protein supplements intake and.....oh no.., where did the money go? I better get a second job...
Protein in bulk is a pittance, a 5kg tub lasts me a month so £27 is hardly breaking the bank (for me). i rely more on getting 8 hours sleep and eating good solid foods for recovery
Supplements supplement a good diet. Rest, sensible exercise and decent recovery methods will do far more than them and are a lot cheaper. However, if you're pretty sorted with that and have a little extra cash then you may as well. Whey protein is essentially refined milk it barely counts as a supplement, plenty of foods go through more processing. For the record, just being in the right frame of mind to lift will benefit you more than any supplement.
There is ONLY one thing wrong, you aren't eating enough. If you eat enough, your weight will increase, if you don't, it won't. That is a hard and fast rule that doesn't change, short of some kind of digestional failure, in which case you'd be skin and bones and in the hospital with malnourishment. Just eat more, eat absoulutely everything in sight and you'll grow. Don't worry about eating healthy if you're trying to bulk. You gotta make sure you get enough protein, but after that, you gotta make sure you meat your calorie quota for the day by eating everything, including cake and chips and everything else. Once you get up to the weight you want, if you've gained a little fat, you can easily use your new muscle mass to burn it off quick by just cutting back a little.
Thanks for the post. That was actually it, i wasn't eating right. I used to stuff myself in 3 big meals, but the trick was to add those 3 snacks in beetween. It worked, i gained 5 kg. I'm back to regural training now and getting back to 81 slowly.
I'm confused, at the start you said you wanted to be about 85kg and then coming up to a fight drop a bit of weight (plus presumably a sauna) to hit 80kg, so why are you trying to get back to 81kg now? Are you fighting soon? Also, did you take measurements regarding your weight increases? Hopefully, the waist didn't increase much, but upper arms, thighs and chest increased significantly indicating it was mainly muscle. LOL regarding Adam's comment that people state that they've got training and nutrition right but aren't getting results. Adam: I'm interested in your comment regarding something like 25-40 reps per bodypart per week - is this a personal observation? The biggest problem with these sorts of statements is that everybody has different definitions of bodyparts. E.g. if each week I do 20 reps of squats and 20 reps of deadlifts, is this 40 reps for legs or 20? It depends on whether you count deadlifts as a leg excercise (you'd obviously count it as a back excercise). Another example is what do you do for arms - only count isolations (which you may not do) or count all pushing and pulling movements (which will be at least 70% of your excercises)? I'd also suggest that less reps per week can get results, it will just be slower than optimal. Whereas too many reps per week will get no results at all.
Yes, i'll probably be fighting soon. I'm often the last one to know i got a fight coming up, so i got to be prepared. Other than that i lost 2 kgs when i got back to aerobic training, so you can say it was mainly muscle i gained, but a fair % of fat too. I'd say 60-40 at best (muscle-fat).
It's different for everyone to be honest, and it also depends on the intensity. The Prilepin's chart shows this, which shows less than 24-40/50. Personally I get better results with this but some people work better with a much higher volume. Percent Range Reps Per Set Optimal Total Reps Acceptable Volume Range 60-69% 4-8 20 18-30 70-79% 3-6 18 12-24 80-89% 2-4 15 10-20 90-99% 1-2 4 4-10 100% 1 1-2 1-2 It depends on your frequency of training too. Basically, you need to make sure you are consistently doing enough, often enough, and getting enough food and rest. Only when you get those things right is it worth worrying more about volume etc. It was Chad Waterbury who said he works off using 24-50 reps per movement/body part per workout (not per week!), but he always highlights that not going to failure is important with his workouts.
Chad Waterbury is definitely on the higher volume side in terms of strength coaches and writers. People such as Ian King and Stuart McRoberts preach a much lower volume and do deliver results. Personally my strength gains only seems to happen when my total weekly sets (excluding warm-ups) are at most 30. Following most high volume programs (like most of Waterburys) just makes my joints sore and my CNS fried. So in short, I disagree with your statement regarding the required volume. That said, you do provide a lot good information to this forum and I do thank you for that.
What statement? I just said that I personally work better with the lower volume approach you are referring to Also, the importance of training away from failure cannot be emphasised enough with those higher volume programs, hence the ability of some people to cope with them.
Sorry I missed the bit where you stated that you prefer lower volume. Although it seems a little strange your earlier post recommended at least 24 reps per excercise per workout, but you don't follow this.
One coaches opinion is just that, one coaches opinion. If someone thinks they are sorted regarding training and nutrition yet they aren't making any progress, it's either nutrition, training volume or consistency. 24-50 reps is a good range for hypertrophy and many successful set/rep programs fit into this category eg. 5x5, 8x3, 4x6 etc. but many people have also seen results with less.
