Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Stick to training related posts.

Moderators: Dux, seeahill

User avatar
Bram
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6145
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:38 am

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Bram » Wed Aug 26, 2020 11:19 pm

Fat Cat wrote:
Wed Aug 26, 2020 10:48 pm
I agree with the spirit of your post, Bram but let's not pretend that this guy isn't gassed up. There's a lot more than solid nutrition and 10 hours of sleep at work here.
200lbs and lean is a different beast than 300lbs and lean.

However, regardless of gear, eating 7000 calories of high-quality food regularly is just as impressive as his workouts.
"When you seek it, you cannot find it.” — Zen riddle

User avatar
Fat Cat
Jesus Christ®
Posts: 40134
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:54 pm
Location: 悪を根付かせるな

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Fat Cat » Wed Aug 26, 2020 11:56 pm

LOL true. I can easily, if I'm being a piggy, eat 3,500 a day but doubling that makes me feel sick just thinking about it. But according to his IG he's 6'7" and 352 shredded and it ain't chicken breasts that got him looking like that:

https://www.instagram.com/tom_haviland/?hl=en

I'm not trying to say it's easy to do what he does, but even HE couldn't do what he does without some help. Which is a long way of saying, I'm not sure there's many lessons to learn from someone like that. And I don't say that to be a natty-bro bitch, but the point of this thread was evidence-based best practices for natural trainees.
Image
"My hatred of humanity grows daily with my increased awareness." -motherjuggs&speed

User avatar
newguy
Sgt. Major
Posts: 2555
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:32 am

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by newguy » Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:09 am

Fat Cat wrote:
Wed Aug 26, 2020 11:56 pm
LOL true. I can easily, if I'm being a piggy, eat 3,500 a day but doubling that makes me feel sick just thinking about it. But according to his IG he's 6'7" and 352 shredded and it ain't chicken breasts that got him looking like that:

https://www.instagram.com/tom_haviland/?hl=en

I'm not trying to say it's easy to do what he does, but even HE couldn't do what he does without some help. Which is a long way of saying, I'm not sure there's many lessons to learn from someone like that. And I don't say that to be a natty-bro bitch, but the point of this thread was evidence-based best practices for natural trainees.
I would say that there is nothing to learn from him ESPECIALLY if he is a natty. Genetically most of us are nothing like him.

I always think of a high school friend of mine, a guy named Rob. Rob was JACKED. Cut round biceps. Cut six pack stomach. Lats. Pec. Looked like a young bodybuilder. Rob's exercise was mowing his mom's lawn with a push mower and doing some body weight work.

He was not on any gear. He didn't even lift weights.

You have genetic freaks out there.

And we all know this from our own bodies. My calves and forearms are sick. Calves especially are outstanding. But both calves and forearms are awesome. I almost never directly train either of them.

You get people who win the genetic lottery with more than two body parts.

It's not just being natural.

It's being natural with normal genetics as opposed to natural with super freak genetics.

User avatar
Fat Cat
Jesus Christ®
Posts: 40134
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:54 pm
Location: 悪を根付かせるな

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Fat Cat » Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:55 am

Yes, there are real freaks in the world. Life is amazing in its variations, and to quote Wendler, "I love the inequality of nature."

BUT, people were putting this juicehog genetic anomaly out as an example of the value of strongman training for hypertrophy and while i find it interesting and want to know more--sincerely--it's with the caveat that it's pretty f'n far from actionable advice for the natty bodybuilder who wants to kick sand at the beach.

That said, it doesn't mean we all wouldn't benefit from some farmer's walks.
Image
"My hatred of humanity grows daily with my increased awareness." -motherjuggs&speed

User avatar
newguy
Sgt. Major
Posts: 2555
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:32 am

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by newguy » Thu Aug 27, 2020 3:30 am

I guess in a round about way I was trying to say that if you have the right genetics, a lot of things work. Including strongman. If you have been blessed with the ability to naturally carry muscle with little fat then mowing the lawn works.

I can do strongman shit until I am blue in the face and what will happen is my magnificent calves and forearms will be even more so. The rest of me? Maybe not so much.

I don't think you can ever separate out methods of transforming your physique from your natural body type.

The discussion of one has to include the other.

User avatar
SubClaw
Top
Posts: 1925
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2011 5:01 pm

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by SubClaw » Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:59 am

"Everyone should be training as a mild strongman competitor". For the life of me, I can't remember where I read this, but it kinda resonated with me.

I seem to recall he was a retired SF operator who now follows loosely a strongman template and crushes CF amateur athletes on a regular basis.

And I get it. Mild strongman training is sensible, sustainable and repetable Crossfit (broad modal domains and all that shit).
Image

Luke
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2011 11:19 am

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Luke » Thu Aug 27, 2020 6:02 am

Oh, I just put Haviland out there as an example of the types of lists I mentioned - as Bryant writes his training. Definitely not natural. And yep, that's the book, Fat Cat.

Subclaw's right as far as I know. He left special forces with enough money to train full-time. Originally they had a project trying to get him up to 400lbs, which evolved into the Tactical Hypertrophy program - presumably as he's military...and I'm pretty sure he's a fucking Jujitsu instructor too.

Coincidentally, similar to O'Hearn, when the training, time and diet are super dialled in - and probably stress too if you consider he's comfortable not working, for example - it's nagging we'll never know where the gear starts and stops.

The metapoint was Hatfield thought strongman combined modalities like powerlifting, olympic lifting and bodybuilding into a perfect mix. When individually, modalities such as power/oly lifting all had drawbacks. So if someone wanted to take their training elsewhere - it'd be a great place to start. That's why I offered it up as the most accessible thing vs. taking a physical labour job - and it doesn't have to be at the expense of your usual training.

Bryant trains gearheads and natties, and his powerbuilding emphasis will get you results even if you're natural.

User avatar
Beer Jew
Sgt. Major
Posts: 3299
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2011 6:35 pm

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Beer Jew » Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:06 pm

There’s a good reason no bodybuilder in the history of bodybuilding who was remotely successful trained like a strongman.

Ever been to a truly natural strongman or powerlifting competition? Difficult to know who’s a spectator and who’s a competitor. A little easier at bodybuilding shows because the spectators are wearing clothes and generally have less fake tan.

User avatar
Beer Jew
Sgt. Major
Posts: 3299
Joined: Sun Jan 16, 2011 6:35 pm

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Beer Jew » Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:11 pm

Explosive training doesn’t build visible muscle. The core of strongman training; push presses, deadlifts, weighted carries etc are pretty ineffective at packing on mass.

Stuff that does work?

- Dialling in form
- Controlled reps
- Feeling the muscle work and contract
- Hitting the muscle from different angles
- Working to near muscular failure

Plenty of natty guys in most gyms squatting 4 plates+, deadlifting 5 plates etc. Don’t look like they lift.

The guys who do are training like bodybuilders.

User avatar
newguy
Sgt. Major
Posts: 2555
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:32 am

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by newguy » Thu Aug 27, 2020 1:43 pm

IDK where the idea that Fred Hatfield advocated strongman training for bodybuilding is coming from.

He didn't.

I have his book on building muscle laying around somewhere. If I recall, he advocated working the various muscle fibers by doing a range of repetitions. I don't remember of this was over the course of a week or month. But it was something like high reps to build the slow fibers, lower reps for the fast twitch, that sort of thing.

It was very power bodybuilding style.

He did feel that strongman style training was better for physical development than just cardio. It's where his whole beer keg challenge argument came in.

Specifically he actually though (I think) that bodybuilding was better for overall health and wellness than excessive running. And I am extrapolating there.

I also don't know where this idea is that people who have a physically laborious job are jacked is coming from. Some of them are skinny. Some of them are fat. Some of them are jacked.

User avatar
odin
Sgt. Major
Posts: 3088
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 10:20 am

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by odin » Thu Aug 27, 2020 4:47 pm

Beer Jew wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 12:11 pm
Explosive training doesn’t build visible muscle. The core of strongman training; push presses, deadlifts, weighted carries etc are pretty ineffective at packing on mass.

Stuff that does work?

- Dialling in form
- Controlled reps
- Feeling the muscle work and contract
- Hitting the muscle from different angles
- Working to near muscular failure

Plenty of natty guys in most gyms squatting 4 plates+, deadlifting 5 plates etc. Don’t look like they lift.

The guys who do are training like bodybuilders.
I think you overstate the first point but the second list is in keeping with my experience. Another variable worth discussing: exercise variation. I just did variations of the power lifts in my late twenties and looked like a bouncer or rugby player from the 90’s. With greater exercise variety and more focus on using the weight to work the muscle than the muscle to work the weight I look - unsurprisingly- more like a bodybuilder.
Don't try too hard, don't not try too hard

User avatar
nafod
Lifetime IGer
Posts: 12461
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 5:01 pm
Location: Looking in your window

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by nafod » Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:04 pm

Gymnasts tend to look thoroughly honed.
Don’t believe everything you think.

User avatar
newguy
Sgt. Major
Posts: 2555
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:32 am

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by newguy » Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:05 pm

For bodybuilding hypertrophy the mind/muscle connection matters.

You have to feel the muscle working.

It's why isolation exercises are important. You feel the muscle flexing and contracting better.

Form for bodybuilding is not about maximizing the mechanical/leverages to move the most weight. Form is about moving in a way that creates the most tension.

User avatar
newguy
Sgt. Major
Posts: 2555
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:32 am

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by newguy » Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:06 pm

nafod wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:04 pm
Gymnasts tend to look thoroughly honed.
It's because fat chunky kids don't go into gymnastics.

Big fat chunky kids get put on the offensive line.

User avatar
Fat Cat
Jesus Christ®
Posts: 40134
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:54 pm
Location: 悪を根付かせるな

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Fat Cat » Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:35 pm

newguy wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 3:30 am
I don't think you can ever separate out methods of transforming your physique from your natural body type.
That, I agree with completely. I'm not gonna look like Serge Nubret even if I did his workout with his drugs, horsemeat, and hookers.
Image
"My hatred of humanity grows daily with my increased awareness." -motherjuggs&speed

User avatar
Fat Cat
Jesus Christ®
Posts: 40134
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:54 pm
Location: 悪を根付かせるな

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Fat Cat » Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:36 pm

nafod wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:04 pm
Gymnasts tend to look thoroughly honed.
That's selection bias. Also, gymnasts are little twerps. They look jacked on TV but when you meet them they're 5'3". SAD!
Image
"My hatred of humanity grows daily with my increased awareness." -motherjuggs&speed

User avatar
SubClaw
Top
Posts: 1925
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2011 5:01 pm

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by SubClaw » Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:39 pm

Fat Cat wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:35 pm
newguy wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 3:30 am
I don't think you can ever separate out methods of transforming your physique from your natural body type.
That, I agree with completely. I'm not gonna look like Serge Nubret even if I did his workout with his drugs, horsemeat, and hookers.
That's a given: he was black. :finga:
Image

User avatar
Bram
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 6145
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 11:38 am

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Bram » Thu Aug 27, 2020 7:40 pm

Fat Cat wrote:
Wed Aug 26, 2020 11:56 pm
LOL true. I can easily, if I'm being a piggy, eat 3,500 a day but doubling that makes me feel sick just thinking about it. But according to his IG he's 6'7" and 352 shredded and it ain't chicken breasts that got him looking like that:

https://www.instagram.com/tom_haviland/?hl=en

I'm not trying to say it's easy to do what he does, but even HE couldn't do what he does without some help. Which is a long way of saying, I'm not sure there's many lessons to learn from someone like that. And I don't say that to be a natty-bro bitch, but the point of this thread was evidence-based best practices for natural trainees.
Not giving him a pass on the drugs, I just have a respect I guess for how hard the food part is. I think we undervalue it, until it's dialed in.

3500 calories of clean food and 3500 calories of dirty food are not the same. The extra fiber and protein and lower sugar (and potentially lower fat), mean that you probably are already full. And you have to fight against that satiety.

At my heaviest, fit weight of 223lbs, I was eating 5 x 850 calories of clean food daily. I had started with 5 x 750 and added 25 calories per meal each time I hit a wall. I would often yell at mealtime to help me choke down the food. It sucked.

And I'm sorry if you're not discounting it and I'm just reading it wrong. The diet part is the real discipline of all of this, IMO.
"When you seek it, you cannot find it.” — Zen riddle

User avatar
Fat Cat
Jesus Christ®
Posts: 40134
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:54 pm
Location: 悪を根付かせるな

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Fat Cat » Thu Aug 27, 2020 7:52 pm

Yeah I don't think we disagree at all about diet, I don't discount it at all.
Image
"My hatred of humanity grows daily with my increased awareness." -motherjuggs&speed

User avatar
SubClaw
Top
Posts: 1925
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2011 5:01 pm

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by SubClaw » Thu Aug 27, 2020 8:30 pm

Bram wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 7:40 pm
3500 calories of clean food and 3500 calories of dirty food are not the same. The extra fiber and protein and lower sugar (and potentially lower fat), mean that you probably are already full. And you have to fight against that satiety.
I find it WAY harder to overeat on purpose than simply staying hungry and angry.
Image

User avatar
Fat Cat
Jesus Christ®
Posts: 40134
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 4:54 pm
Location: 悪を根付かせるな

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Fat Cat » Thu Aug 27, 2020 8:35 pm

Overeating is gross. Unless someone is actually paying you to look or perform a way that requires it, I can't see the justification.
Image
"My hatred of humanity grows daily with my increased awareness." -motherjuggs&speed

User avatar
Sangoma
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 7018
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Sangoma » Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:04 pm

newguy wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:06 pm
nafod wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:04 pm
Gymnasts tend to look thoroughly honed.
It's because fat chunky kids don't go into gymnastics.

Big fat chunky kids get put on the offensive line.
That's partly true. But they all start skinny and at some level get very muscular. It's time under tension and mechanically inefficient angles that result in high muscle tension that make muscle grow.
Image

User avatar
Sangoma
Sergeant Commanding
Posts: 7018
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 11:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Sangoma » Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:11 pm

Bram wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 7:40 pm

3500 calories of clean food and 3500 calories of dirty food are not the same.
I am yet to see credible evidence of it. There is a big crowd of IIFYM, if it fits your macros, that thrives on chocolate milk and hamburgers.

That's one of the advantages of drugs: you are able to put much more work in training, and so extra calories, wherever they come from, are not punishing.

Given the satiating effects and slow rate of digestion of protein I doubt it is possible to get considerable amount of calories from it. So they have to come from fat and/or carbs. 100 g of white rice is about 100 kcal. A kilo of it 1000 kcal. Good luck eating it. And then some to get to 7000 a day.
Image

User avatar
newguy
Sgt. Major
Posts: 2555
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:32 am

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by newguy » Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:19 pm

Sangoma wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:04 pm
newguy wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:06 pm
nafod wrote:
Thu Aug 27, 2020 5:04 pm
Gymnasts tend to look thoroughly honed.
It's because fat chunky kids don't go into gymnastics.

Big fat chunky kids get put on the offensive line.
That's partly true. But they all start skinny and at some level get very muscular. It's time under tension and mechanically inefficient angles that result in high muscle tension that make muscle grow.
The gold medalist Sam Mikulak is 5 foot 6 and weights 141 pounds.

I would not call this very muscular......

Luke
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 483
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2011 11:19 am

Re: Evidence-based recommendations for natural bodybuilding

Post by Luke » Thu Aug 27, 2020 11:34 pm

PEOPLE!

Motherjuggs was talking about the physiques of those who do physical jobs:
"We all have a lot of training concepts in our heads but where do you see the best builds on guys who don't seem genetically gifted and also not on the program? Guys who do physical jobs."
And I suggested strongman closely resembles it, so you could merge that with your own training - and why Hatfield thought so highly of it.

If you look at the off-season training of some of Bryant's bodybuilders - they do keg carries etc. but of course not at the expense of conventional bodybuilding. And that's the whole point, you don't stay strictly in the lane of whatever you're competing in.

But I agree with Beer Jew as naturals generally being way too conservative in training.

Post Reply