Power Bellies | Carl Raghavan

[stef]

My mind’s telling me no, but my body is telling me yeah! You want it, you know you do, but you’re too scared to admit it. A glorious power belly. Commencing operation “See-Food” Diet. The world is your oyster, literally. I just heard every single Men’s Health and GQ subscriber shriek in terror simultaneously. “No, not my abs!” Oh yes, I’m about to open a can of whoop-ass about why a power belly is so magnificent.

Read article

[tompaynter]

Re: Power Bellies | Carl Raghavan

As a starting strength trainee and owner of a bit of a power belly, I'm behind the point Coach Raghavan is trying to make here. But this article does not make the point in the most effective way.

He starts of listing the measurements of some elite bodybuilders who had enormous chests, thighs, etc. and tiny waists. Then states "So you’d best believe they get a little round in the belly department in order to build this amount of muscle mass." So you'd best believe is neither evidence nor argument. The only evidence he has given us is that it's possible to be huge and strong and have a small waist.

"The key take-home message here is that if you’re enormous when you’re walking around at 15–20% bodyfat, then you will still be big at 5% if the cut is done correctly." There's a logical fallacy underlying this. He's saying if you are big at 15-20% you'll be big at 5%, therefore it is necessary to be at 15-20% in order to get big at 5%. Note that I'm not saying he's wrong in his conclusion, just that his argument is not sound. He simply hasn't provided any evidence that one must bulk up at a higher body fat percentage in order to get big--in fact all the examples of huge but lean men go the other way. Evidence would be measurements, pictures, etc. of men like Arnold between contests, showing the power bellies Raghavan asserts they had while getting big.

It goes on. "Our aesthetics are a by-product of the skills and fitness we possess." Then why cite examples of guys with good aesthetics--Mr. Olympias--who trained specifically for aesthetics rather than developing aesthetics as a byproduct? "With that in mind, I’ve always prioritized performance, ever since I was a kid....So if that means transforming into a musclebound gorilla with a power belly in order to reach my goals, then so be it.... I want to be strong, really fucking strong, in all the barbell lifts." Ok. Stands to reason that if you want to be as strong as possible, eating a lot and getting a big belly will help. But why are we talking about elite bodybuilders then?

Presumably someone who clicks on an article about power bellies is somewhat concerned with aesthetics. I guess Raghavan's point is even if that is your concern, get big first, suffer with the belly for awhile, then cut, as he says in the last paragraph. Or is it that aesthetics and strength are completely unconnected: "Unlike the physique-obsessed robots who can eat dry chicken breast, rice and broccoli all day, eating for strength tastes awesome. But has a different purpose – not Olympia-stage-ready, covered in brown spray paint, wearing a thong – strength." So is eating for strength the best way to ultimately look like Mr. Olympia, or not? "Would you rather be strong or pretty? That’s the dilemma." Sounds like it isn't and we have to choose.

Again, I get the point, because I have read and listened to a lot of other SS material and I've done the program. But reading this with the eye of someone new who stumbles on your site, it does not get the message across in a logical and convincing way.

[Carl Raghavan]

You’re putting words into my mouth here, and in any case, what I’ve said is factually correct. If you don’t know what elite bodybuilders look like off-season then you obviously haven’t followed bodybuilding closely enough. Dorian Yates, Ronnie Coleman and Markus Rühl were not called mass monsters for nothing. Have you seen the size of Big Ramy? Do you know how much food these guys constantly shove into their pie holes, day in and day out, for years? It’s something most people will never be able to comprehend. The reason I included this section is because bodybuilders are the reason many people who train for strength are abs-obsessed and want them all year around – when that’s not how even elite bodybuilders train. That’s my point. They are not 5% all year around. (They also take steroids, which helps in the pursuit of attaining lean body mass, but that’s another story.)

Ronnie Coleman had a big power belly in the off season and is undoubtedly the GOAT of bodybuilding. Even Phil Heath in his later years was called out for having a “bubble gut.” Google will show you all the pictures you need – I don’t need to look them up for you. The photos speak for themselves. There has been a lot of talk for a while that bodybuilders are getting too big in the midriff in their attempts to be even bigger than the last generation.

The overall message, I think, was pretty clear. If you’re worried about your aesthetics in a medium T shirt, you should grow to an XXL then go on a cut.

This is my thirty-fifth article on the site, and many of them deal with gaining weight. This article is part of a conversation, and I don’t need to recap everything I have already said elsewhere in order for the argument to be valid. Please be aware that my work all links together, drawing on my experience of what is effective and logical.

Maybe I’m wrong, but your comment makes you seem triggered in some way. I’m sorry if that’s the case, but these are the facts. I’ve been 70kg and I’ve been 120kg. I know which weight I was stronger at and which one looks more impressive – and the same goes for all my clients and everyone who has taken my advice (hint: it wasn’t when I was 70kg). Truth is, training isn’t that complicated. Get bigger, and you will add on muscle mass and fat. Cut back on fat, and voila: the muscle is revealed underneath. There isn’t really any debate about that. People just don’t want to believe it.

Thanks for your feedback, it keeps me on my toes.

[asm44]

I agree. A problem with a lot of the articles is that they are just rehashing what Rip has written/said and end up injecting untrue bullshit to try and make it a little bit original.

[EdTice]

I think you may have misunderstood the article. I'm hardly qualified to *write* such an article and so I loathe to say anything that might be considered additive, but I'll try to rephrase for you a bit.

If you want to get on stage with 5% bodyfat, the path to get there is to first be really huge with 15% bodyfat and then cut that bodyfat to 5%. What you can't do is start at 5% and stay at 5% while putting on a lot of muscle.

The actual biology if this is fairly complicated and I may not explain it well. Essentially fat drives recovery and muscle building. If you don't have enough of it, you simply can't build muscle. If you start at 5% and stay at 5%, you'll never have enough muscle to be big.


What you (and me and everybody else) needs to do is to eat for strength *until they are strong*. Once you're strong, you have a choice. You can keep enjoying delicious food and continue to get stronger. Or you can start living on chicken and broccoli to cut fat so that you are now strong and lean.

However, once you start the chicken and broccoli diet, you're done gaining muscle mass. You've committed to not getting any bigger. However, that choice isn't permanent.

You can get strong (or strongish) at 15% body fat, decide to cut to 5%, and then change your mind that you aren't really as "big" as you thought you were. There are many possibilities.

The point here is that although there are many things *possible*, the one thing that is *impossible* is to continue to put on muscle mass if you aren't willing to allow your body fat to rise while getting stronger and putting on more muscle.

Guys who get close to their genetic limit can't put on much more muscle anyway so they can either decide to be happy and enjoy life and eat. Or they can cut fat. The point is that strong people have choices. Weak people don't. So get strong *first* and then worry about the other stuff.

Maybe the article isn't clear for those who haven't worked hard understanding the material. I don't know. But I understood it and Mark has said repeatedly that I'm not very bright, so it can't be that inapproachble.

I hope you are at least enjoying a delicious strength diet!

[Mark Rippetoe]

I agree. A problem with a lot of the articles is that they are just rehashing what Rip has written/said and end up injecting untrue bullshit to try and make it a little bit original.

What was "untrue"?

[Gerald Boggs]

I admit, I don't understand the comparisons between bodybuilders of different eras.

[Jerry Naughton]

I enjoyed the article and as a newcomer to the Starting Strength program who's old and obese, it's good to get regular reinforcements to focus on plenty of protein and that if the scale is dropping YNDTP. Pants have gotten tighter but it's because my butt is getting bigger - not my waist!

Could you please spell out for a complete noob what "LP" stands for - couldn't figure it out from the context.

Thanks.

[tompaynter]

You’re putting words into my mouth here, and in any case, what I’ve said is factually correct. If you don’t know what elite bodybuilders look like off-season then you obviously haven’t followed bodybuilding closely enough. Dorian Yates, Ronnie Coleman and Markus Rühl were not called mass monsters for nothing. Have you seen the size of Big Ramy? Do you know how much food these guys constantly shove into their pie holes, day in and day out, for years? It’s something most people will never be able to comprehend. The reason I included this section is because bodybuilders are the reason many people who train for strength are abs-obsessed and want them all year around – when that’s not how even elite bodybuilders train. That’s my point. They are not 5% all year around. (They also take steroids, which helps in the pursuit of attaining lean body mass, but that’s another story.)

Ronnie Coleman had a big power belly in the off season and is undoubtedly the GOAT of bodybuilding. Even Phil Heath in his later years was called out for having a “bubble gut.” Google will show you all the pictures you need – I don’t need to look them up for you. The photos speak for themselves. There has been a lot of talk for a while that bodybuilders are getting too big in the midriff in their attempts to be even bigger than the last generation.

The overall message, I think, was pretty clear. If you’re worried about your aesthetics in a medium T shirt, you should grow to an XXL then go on a cut.

This is my thirty-fifth article on the site, and many of them deal with gaining weight. This article is part of a conversation, and I don’t need to recap everything I have already said elsewhere in order for the argument to be valid. Please be aware that my work all links together, drawing on my experience of what is effective and logical.

Maybe I’m wrong, but your comment makes you seem triggered in some way. I’m sorry if that’s the case, but these are the facts. I’ve been 70kg and I’ve been 120kg. I know which weight I was stronger at and which one looks more impressive – and the same goes for all my clients and everyone who has taken my advice (hint: it wasn’t when I was 70kg). Truth is, training isn’t that complicated. Get bigger, and you will add on muscle mass and fat. Cut back on fat, and voila: the muscle is revealed underneath. There isn’t really any debate about that. People just don’t want to believe it.

Thanks for your feedback, it keeps me on my toes.

Yeah the section on bodybuilders is the most confusing part of the piece, especially since you lead off the article with it and it's about one-third of the whole piece. Again, I'm sure you are factually correct, that BBers eat huge amounts of food and bulk up to get big. But let's break those first 9 or so paragraphs down.

You lead off by telling us you are going to "open a can of whoop-ass about why a power belly is so magnificent." 2nd paragraph: elite BBers are born to look that way--not everyone can but everyone can get stronger. 3rd paragraph: Let's compare Frank Zane, 3X Mr. O, and Phil Heath, 7X Mr. O. Measurements. Heath was bigger overall but they had the same waist size. Your conclusion: bigger is better, I guess because Heath won 4 more times? But 1) winning even once is pretty awesome, and 2) again they had the same waist size, but this article is supposed to be about the importance of a big belly.

By this point I'm getting confused, as a reader. Where is this going? Then you compare Arnold and Ronnie. Ronnie was quite a big bigger and had a 6" bigger waist. You conclude, "the bigger boy wins again. Size does matter. Even in the elite levels of bodybuilding, the bigger guy usually wins." What? Arnold is the most famous and successful bodybuilder who ever lived, safe to say. Did Ronnie beat him at some point? I read Muscle and Fitness for years and I couldn't tell you. Are trying to convince your readers by using Arnold as the "don't be like this" example??? Then you tell us that the current Mr. O is "big all over". Ok....

Then you transition into your claims about how elite BBers are not shredded all year round, for which, as I said before, you offer no evidence.

So in the first 3rd of the article, after your mission statement about the awesomeness of the power belly, we've heard zero supporting evidence that having a big belly is necessary to get big, or that people with big bellies are stronger. As a reader I'm lost, I have no idea what the point of citing the measurements of these huge guys with 30" waists was--which is the most specific data you've given and which grabs the eye.

Here's an alternate way to write it: take one or two of you BBer examples. Given their competition measurements. But then describe their off-season routine/the routine they followed to get big, ideally with quotes and pictures. How much food, how heavy the lifts. Show us a picture of Arnold looking puffy sitting down do a big plate of ribs with a smile. If you want to use elite BBers to show why having a power belly (for awhile at least) is important, that's how you do it. "Do you know how much food these guys constantly shove into their pie holes, day in and day out, for years?" Nope, and after reading your article I still don't.

[Mark Rippetoe]

Tom, I have an idea. Write us an article about how to write an article. Be sure to include evidence for your assertions.