{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
4/26/2016 3:23:38 PM
10
Ive never actually tried maxing..... I prefer many reps over higher weights but i can do 10 reps of 180 and I weigh 170....... So iunno if thats meh or mehhhh.
To be honest im just glad Im not fat XD
English
-
That's not a good way to build strength. You'll tear way more muscles fibres by lifting heavy at lower volume vs light weights at high volume.
-
Not necessarily. Lifting heavy is more nervous system work. It's about using all muscles available. Light for high is good for tearing muscle, making it swell, etc. Both work though
-
No, you don't know what you're talking about
-
I do. Heavy lifts will tear muscle down. But if you do a heavy workout of singles, you won't tear nearly as much muscle as a bodybuilding workout. There is a reason bodybuilders typically don't do heavy work a lot, it's because it doesn't work as well for their purpose. The real benefit of heavy lifts is firing the nervous system with more capacity. That's why power lifters typically go heavier, it because they care about weight not looks, so if they only gain 10 lbs of muscle they use every strand of it.
-
I'm so sorry you've fallen victim to fitness misinformation your entire life and actually believe thats true.
-
Well I mean I was educated by my football coaches who have scientific backing. Whereas you are just a guy on the Internet who hasn't backed their claim once. All you've done is say I'm wrong, say I've been lied to, etc. back up your claims that heavy lifting builds more muscle than light lifting.
-
Jose is actually 100% right about everything he said. You should be taking his advice You're young OP and probably haven't figured it out yet but im sure you will soon: 99% of fitness instructors have no knowledge about anatomy and only "learn" things through word of mouth, often misinformation. These are what we call "meatheads." Hate to break it to you but your coach is one of them.
-
Editado por Im Perma Banned: 4/27/2016 9:33:18 PMFootball coaches, that explains it. They would want you focusing on sarcoplasmic hypertrophy to build more endurance. But endurance =/= strength. Lifting light weights focuses more on filling your muscles up with liquid (sarcoplasm) which is optimal for athletes because it helps with endurance. Bodybuilders do this too for bigger and more "toned" looking muscles. But sarcoplasm can't absorb any force, only the muscle fibres can through tension and contraction. If you want to focus more on strength instead of size then heavy weights are the way to go. This is why a powerlifter can always out lift a bodybuilder of the same weight. These are the only facts. You can try to dispute them all you want, but you'll be wrong.
-
You said that heavy weights tear more muscle. Meaning more muscle built. Not stregnth. Yeah of course heavier weights equals more stregnth, but it doesn't necessarily build more muscle. If you are arguing that light means better sarcoplasmic hypertrophy (not familiar with the term but I'll roll with it) then we are arguing the same point
-
Heavy weights will tear more muscle [i]fibres[/i] which means your muscles will be more dense=strength. This is the type of training that powerlifters do. But yeah you're right, this type of training won't build as big and more visible muscles as lighter weights at high volume training will. That type of training (sarcoplasmic hypertrophy) will fill your muscles up with a lot of liquid (sarcoplasm) making them loom bigger. This is the type of bodybuilders do, which explains why a powerlifter the same weight as a bodybuilder can always lift more.
