Rip: Aesthetics and Training Rip: Aesthetics and Training

starting strength gym
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: Rip: Aesthetics and Training

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    48,500

    Default Rip: Aesthetics and Training

    • starting strength seminar june 2022
    • starting strength seminar august 2022
    • starting strength seminar october 2022

  2. #2
    Ray Gillenwater's Avatar
    Ray Gillenwater is offline Administrator, Starting Strength Gyms
    Starting Strength Coach
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    California
    Posts
    317

    Default

    The fact that the conventional wisdom and standard media narrative are so far removed from what actually occurs in practice tells us everything we need to know about the state of common "knowledge." One of the most useful side effects of going through the process of getting stronger is that it proves to you that this method works and the conventional method does not, contrary to what everyone around you at the commercial gym might believe. It encourages verification of evidence, skepticism of the claims of others, and coming to one's own conclusions based on personal experience.

    If something as fundamental to health and fitness as strength is this poorly understood by almost everyone you know, medical professionals, and the health and fitness industry, what other common knowledge is worth closer examination? Other than the direct physical and psychological benefits of getting bigger and stronger, this is one of the most important aspects of the process: self experimentation, self verification, and coming to one's own conclusions, no matter how far removed that conclusion is from everyone else's. In current times, this capability is more relevant to the quality and future outlook of our lives than it's ever been, at least in my lifetime.

    The fact that we know how this works and we've verified our theory hundreds of thousands, if not millions of times via strength trainees all around the world, is one of the reasons I think the expansion of the gym franchise is going so well. We have a solution to important quality of life problems that people in the mainstream aren't privy too. It's almost like we are providing access to a new piece of technology that can dramatically change people's lives, although a seven foot piece of steel, iron plates, sets of five, and adding five more pounds isn't what anyone would expect as a modern innovation.

    I'm more baffled than ever by people that outsource their thinking to "experts," companies, and/or bureaucracies. Whether the individual's or organizations intentions are good or not is irrelevant. Trusting strangers to come to important conclusions on our behalf is a bad idea.
    Last edited by Ray Gillenwater; 11-17-2021 at 12:44 PM.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Posts
    2,717

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ray Gillenwater View Post
    The fact that the conventional wisdom and standard media narrative are so far removed from what actually occurs in practice tells us everything we need to know about the state of common "knowledge." One of the most useful side effects of going through the process of getting stronger is that it proves to you that this method works and the conventional method does not, contrary to what everyone around you at the commercial gym might believe. It encourages verification of evidence, skepticism of the claims of others, and coming to one's own conclusions based on personal experience.

    If something as fundamental to health and fitness as strength is this poorly understood by almost everyone you know, medical professionals, and the health and fitness industry, what other common knowledge is worth closer examination? Other than the direct physical and psychological benefits of getting bigger and stronger, this is one of the most important aspects of the process: self experimentation, self verification, and coming to one's own conclusions, no matter how far removed that conclusion is from everyone else's. In current times, this capability is more relevant to the quality and future outlook of our lives than it's ever been, at least in my lifetime.

    The fact that we know how this works and we've verified our theory hundreds of thousands, if not millions of times via strength trainees all around the world, is one of the reasons I think the expansion of the gym franchise is going so well. We have a solution to important quality of life problems that people in the mainstream aren't privy too. It's almost like we are providing access to a new piece of technology that can dramatically change people's lives, although a seven foot piece of steel, iron plates, sets of five, and adding five more pounds isn't what anyone would expect as a modern innovation.

    I'm more baffled than ever by people that outsource their thinking to "experts," companies, and/or bureaucracies. Whether the individual's or organizations intentions are good or not is irrelevant. Trusting strangers to come to important conclusions on our behalf is a bad idea.
    Yes to all of the above.

    I’ve tried to articulate an additional thought, without a lot of success. It is that “you can only do the experiment once”. (If I could write, that would be the title)

    By this I mean that as much as we love controls and studies for evidence, it may not be that helpful. At any moment in life, like right now, whatever you do is a unique experiment. AND, you have to do something to include nothing.

    This truth comes out all the time in the context of health. Training, diet, injuries, and disease. What are you going to do? Who are you going to take advice from? Every time you do something you are conducting a brand new experiment. The variables have changed. You’re older, stronger, weaker, smarter, sicker, whatever.

    Did you pick the best thing? Pretty good thing? One of the worst? You will never know. That’s reality. A smart person makes educated guesses and recognizes the irrevocable nature of their personal experiment.

    Does that make sense?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    1,797

    Default

    From my own limited experience fucking around with bodybuilding type training methods, it seems like the main "hypertrophy" benefit is they just produce much more pronounced muscle pump, and a bit of lingering "fullness" in the worked muscles for some days afterward (usually accompanied by DOMS, and the inflammation DOMS indicates is probably the real reason for this size increase). That really is the only size-based benefit it seems to have over a strength-based approach. And to continue actual growth, even on that kind of a training program, you still need a progressive overload component that will see some degree of weight increase along the way, and of course, to eat a lot of food. But as far as real strength and muscle gains, some of the most productive work I've ever done were sets of 5 that produced no noticeable muscle pump and very minimal DOMS the next day, if any.

  5. #5
    Ray Gillenwater's Avatar
    Ray Gillenwater is offline Administrator, Starting Strength Gyms
    Starting Strength Coach
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    California
    Posts
    317

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Charles View Post
    Does that make sense?
    Yep. It's especially difficult when multiple variables are being manipulated at the same time and/or the outcome is subtle. On the other hand, the immediate and extreme changes that happen after a few weeks on the program are undeniable. It's one of the few truths in life that are black and white: do the program and you will get significantly bigger and stronger.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    La Jolla California
    Posts
    2,179

    Default

    Great article, esp w the emphasis on drugs and genetics. They cant sell product if you dont make everyone feel like its possible with enough hard work, Gatorade and Nikes. Which is a lie. We cant all be like Mike.

    In my old, fat, ugly opinion, trainees should understand that the further they are from the physical ideals for bodybuilding - shorter, not taller/lankier; leaner, not chubbier; blockier (eg gymnast) not gracile (eg long distance runner); younger not older - the more critical it is to get strong and keep getting stronger. For some of the more gentically/physically gifted among us, going into the gym and "doing weights" will cause them to aesthetically grow. These are the guys who go on to become bodybuilders at a young age and god bless them and their short, stubby little limbs. But what works for them will NOT work their phenotypic opposite. I say that as the phenotypic opposite - tall (6'4" or so, tending towards less muscle naturally, tending towards higher bodfat levels, unable to do chinups until my deadlift got over 450 pounds). I well know of what I speak. This means that strength has to be the way for most of us.

    One of the reasons why strength is the most important thing in this life (I know we quibble about this, but I tend to agree w Rip on this one, even if I am not 100% dedicated to it, because I believe faith and works are very, very important to our time on this rock) is because strength is the key to aesthetics. And we all want to look good. Every fucking one of us (man woman and child; toddler to teenager to geezer/crone) looks better when we have MORE muscle on the body, while maintaing the healthy amount of bodyfat. By building the strength, and continuing to seek greater strength, we build more muscle. Ergo, strength is the foundation of aesthetics.

    Even if one's primary motivation is to look better naked - and Im sure this is the case for many of us on this website - that's not a thing to be shamed. What needs to be understood is that strength is the way to get there, and that strength has some nice side effects of its own: better health, better ability to fight/resist outside forces; better abilty to fight/resist disease (fuck you COVID, Fauci and Obama). We should NEVER set up a loser's paradigm of STRENGTH v AESTHETICs. It should also be thought of as and expressed as strenght and aestehtics. For example: "The best exercise to build a strong and good looking upper body is the Press." Debate me on this.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    369

    Default

    Great Article!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2020
    Posts
    1,324

    Default

    And 225 is not his limit muscular weight – that's where he can be at 9 months. A 5'10” man can carry 275 at 18% bodyfat if he trains and eats correctly, and 20% bodyfat looks just fine if his neck and shoulders are big enough.
    But does he have quad separation?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    1000 miles from everywhere
    Posts
    3

    Default

    In the broadcast Mark mentioned that Carmen was training a woman named Julia who had osteoporosis when she started training after 9 months a scan had shown that it had disappeared. Could we have a followup article detailing what Carmen and Julia were doing. I need something to convince my sisters to start training. Both are doctors in their 60's with severe osteoporosis. One broke her 5th metacarpal bone stepping on her vaccuum cord, not the hose, the cord!. The other one broke a rib leaning over the rail of a puppy crib. Maybe Julia's experience will convince them although they are handicapped with MD's.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    North Texas
    Posts
    48,500

    Default

    starting strength coach development program
    Julia did the program we all do. Started light, added weight to the barbell exercises. That is all.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •