So how does he know that he can do 3 reps with 230 at a BW of 145 if he doesn't lift heavy? My bet is the guy lifts heavy a great deal more than either you're letting on here, or he's letting on to you.
Other than that, there are always genetic freaks out there. What I mean by that, is that it is entirely possible for A FEW people to be that strong, naturally. Sort of like how you look like a bodybuilder without lifting weights. Does that mean NOT lifting weights is the way to get big, just because it works for you? I didn't think so. You see, IF you don't lift weights, your physique is not BECAUSE of you not lifting weights, but IN SPITE of not lifting weights. Big difference. Just the same; IF your friend never lifts heavy, he's that strong IN SPITE of that, not BECAUSE of it. See what I'm saying, or do you need someone who lifts more, boxes more, and reads less to explain it you?
I never said to lift heavy or not.The only thing I mentioned was eat health foods and do alot of reps. read my post again. And like I said my friend says different,and he wasnt always really stong neither.
No, it is NOT a matter of opinion, training is a science. It's a matter of knowledge, theoretical AND applied.
Notice what you claim. Light weights didn't make you ripped, your "eating right" did.
Besides, the topic was not hoe to get ripped, but how to get stronger without gaining weight, so your fat loss really has no relevance to that. One thing that is for sure, the miniscule amount of strength you'll gain in four years of light weights, is NOTHING compared to the strength gain you could have acheived with heavy weights. AND you could keep your current weight. Proven fact, not matter of opinion!
You are WAY too scientific. The modern world got into you BAD. Do you really think most succesful athletes in the world follow those things that you said? I don't know.. we're two totally different people. I just like to do things the way they are.. u know.. ALL NATURAL.
I never said to lift heavy or not.The only thing I mentioned was eat health foods and do alot of reps. read my post again. And like I said my friend says different,and he wasnt always really stong neither.
You can't do a lot of reps with heavy weights. Heavy weights are subjective. What makes them heavy is how heavy they are compared to your 100% lifting capability (1RM). The colser to 100% you get, the less reps you can do.
Add to that, the fact that the bigger the workload-> the bigger the hypertrophy potential (you still need to eat a lot).
Put those two together, and when you say "do lots of reps," and we're talking not gaining, it can ONLY mean light weights. Again, light weights will NOT get you stronger, which I've explained in some detail over a few posts already. I suggest YOU read MY posts again, instead of referring to this buddy of yours, who cannot speak his mind since he isn't here.
If he wasn't always strong, then he has definitely done some heavy lifting to get strong. You didn't answer me before... HOW do you know he can bench press 230 for 3 reps, if he doesn't lift heavy? 230 for 3 reps is heavy, so obviously he IS lifting heavy.
You can't do a lot of reps with heavy weights. Heavy weights are subjective. What makes them heavy is how heavy they are compared to your 100% lifting capability (1RM). The colser to 100% you get, the less reps you can do.
Add to that, the fact that the bigger the workload-> the bigger the hypertrophy potential (you still need to eat a lot).
Put those two together, and when you say "do lots of reps," and we're talking not gaining, it can ONLY mean light weights. Again, light weights will NOT get you stronger, which I've explained in some detail over a few posts already. I suggest YOU read MY posts again, instead of referring to this buddy of yours, who cannot speak his mind since he isn't here.
If he wasn't always strong, then he has definitely done some heavy lifting to get strong. You didn't answer me before... HOW do you know he can bench press 230 for 3 reps, if he doesn't lift heavy? 230 for 3 reps is heavy, so obviously he IS lifting heavy.
Ill take an actual person doing it over Science anytime.haha. Unless my friend is a liar and he actually is hiding that skinny body over a 190lb sculpted body.
And once again I said do alot of reps,I didnt say with what weights. 3reps of 230 isnt alot. You jumped to conclusions a little to fast and ASSUMED I meant he does heavy.hahaha
You are WAY too scientific. The modern world got into you BAD. Do you really think most succesful athletes in the world follow those things that you said? I don't know.. we're two totally different people. I just like to do things the way they are.. u know.. ALL NATURAL.
You know nothing about me. I've been into weight training, physical training (and boxing) a lot longer than your four years, both as a trainer and as a practitioner. I train elite amateur fighters, I have trained national level swimmers and soccer players. I've got an elite trainers education, I've boxed since 1986, I train every day. PLUS I have the theoretical knowledge that you obviously don't have.
It's always easier to aim straight, when you can see what you're aiming at. You "all natural" version is like shooting in the dark.
Ill take an actual person doing it over Science anytime.haha. Unless my friend is a liar and he actually is hiding that skinny body over a 190lb sculpted body.
And once again I said do alot of reps,I didnt say with what weights. 3reps of 230 isnt alot. You jumped to conclusions a little to fast and ASSUMED I meant he does heavy.hahaha
Read my post again, you're turning things upside down now... Do me a favor and read this SLOWLY, 2 or 3 times before you reply.
You say do a lot of reps. A lot of reps can't be done with heavy weights. therefore you must have meant light weight.
I didn't assume you meant he does heavy. I'm saying that since 3 reps is NOT "lots of reps," the he IS lifting heavy, no matter what you say. 3 reps 230 lbs IS heavy, get it?
Your friend doesn't need to be a liar. Like I said, VERY FEW people can be that strong naturally. He could be one of them, meaning that he is that strong IN SPITE of his training, not BECAUSE of it.
Read my post again, you're turning things upside down now... Do me a favor and read this SLOWLY, 2 or 3 times before you reply.
You say do a lot of reps. A lot of reps can't be done with heavy weights. therefore you must have meant light weight.
I didn't assume you meant he does heavy. I'm saying that since 3 reps is NOT "lots of reps," the he IS lifting heavy, no matter what you say. 3 reps 230 lbs IS heavy, get it?
Your friend doesn't need to be a liar. Like I said, VERY FEW people can be that strong naturally. He could be one of them, meaning that he is that strong IN SPITE of his training, not BECAUSE of it.
You know nothing about me. I've been into weight training, physical training (and boxing) a lot longer than your four years, both as a trainer and as a practitioner. I train elite amateur fighters, I have trained national level swimmers and soccer players. I've got an elite trainers education, I've boxed since 1986, I train every day. PLUS I have the theoretical knowledge that you obviously don't have.
It's always easier to aim straight, when you can see what you're aiming at. You "all natural" version is like shooting in the dark.
Obviously you've accomplished way more than an average person. I guess you really me. But some people prefer the "all natural" version. Look at Erik Morales. He also was an all natural guy and beat the **** out of Pacquiao on the first fight. But he was knocked out in the 10th round on the second fight. He did all those things that you just said with the so called "Velocity" or whatever it was and got knocked out in the third round. He looked weak on that fight and I have never seen him so weak in his entire career. So I guess it works great for some people but not a good idea for most.
Obviously you've accomplished way more than an average person. I guess you really me. But some people prefer the "all natural" version. Look at Erik Morales. He also was an all natural guy and beat the **** out of Pacquiao on the first fight. But he was knocked out in the 10th round on the second fight. He did all those things that you just said with the so called "Velocity" or whatever it was and got knocked out in the third round. He looked weak on that fight and I have never seen him so weak in his entire career. So I guess it works great for some people but not a good idea for most.
We're discussing what gets you stronger, light weights or heavy weights! What does that have to do with Erik Morales??? Geez...
1. I don't know enough about the kind of training he did for that fight (or any of his other fights) to defend that training program.
2. I think it's quite unfair to blame what I'm saying on Morales' loss. I had nothing to do with that what so ever. How do you know whether I would advocate his training program or not, when I don't even know myself?
3. There's a lot more to a boxing match than whether a guy did bench presses or whatever, for 8 weeks before a fight.
4. Completely changing an aging athlete's training regimen that lat in his career is not something I would advise, since different training methodologies take a long time to be effective. When I started with my current fighters, it took between 8 months and 1½ years for the effects to really show.
He looked weak on that fight and I have never seen him so weak in his entire career. So I guess it works great for some people but not a good idea for most
5. Whoah! That's quite a leap in logic. From ONE person, Erik Morales, to the conclusion that it doesn't work "for most".... Haha
Besides, WHAT doesn't work for most? Lifting heavy to get stronger? Do you have diagrams of Erik Morales's squat strength, that says his max lift went down because of lifting heavy?? No one ever claimed that lifting heavy will make you a good boxer. Or increase your stamina (which is usually what's lacking when you get knocked out as late as round 10 btw).
Comment