Arkk's Weight Lifting / Fitness Thread

Szeth_sl said:

Yeah I suppose you're right it's not a large amount of sets for any of the muscle groups. Do people usually pair it with anything else?

Click to expand...

Why? Just so you can be sore?

It's a pretty shit program to begin with honestly. I wouldn't run it.

Itlan_sl said:

Thinking of making my own programming based on hitting a PR every time I'm in the gym around 6 exercises and 3, 5, and 8RM in a rotation, so each cycle would be a three week block, and the fatigue shouldn't be too bad since the heaviest I'll go is within a 3RM range.

Click to expand...

What makes you think setting PR's for three weeks is not going to make you tired?

Lyrical_sl said:

What makes you think setting PR's for three weeks is not going to make you tired?

Click to expand...

It's not going to tax my CNS. Tired is relative, cumulative fatigue will set in no matter what eventually, but the fact is I'm bulking and obviously the routine would not start with my absolute max. That's a death sentence.

Agraza_sl said:

I'm the strongest I've ever been, and just a little heavier than I'd like to be. Not sure what you mean by "going south" at 27. I could see going downhill in my 40s, but I'm still on an upswing in my 30s.

Click to expand...

Sports injuries hit me hard. Needed my first surgery at 27, that's what I mean by going south.

I'm excessively prone to joint subluxations, dislocations, and repetitive stress injuries. I dislocated both my radius and ulnar heads in my left elbow late last August, took six weeks off, and ended up with a massive case of tendonitis. Everything is finally calming down and I'm at nearly 100%, but I'm feeling a need to reevaluate my program and start from scratch. It's become painfully obvious that I need to work on stability above all else.

Sucks falling apart at 28.

Khane_sl said:

Sports injuries hit me hard. Needed my first surgery at 27, that's what I mean by going south.

Click to expand...

That's rough. I got lucky with my injuries it seems. Everyone I know around my age that's really active seems to have some kind of achilles heel.

Itlan_sl said:

This is a really dumb thing to believe.

Click to expand...

That's because I dont work out with the volume that I used to, so when its 2-3 days/week at most I generally go longer and change up from what I did the previous session and it leaves plenty of time for recovery. For me, that always gives me muscle soreness.

If your whole goal is "soreness", then you're doing it wrong.

Ambiturner_sl said:

If your whole goal is "soreness", then you're doing it wrong.

Click to expand...

Yea because thats what I said. Try and contain your dumb shit to the NFL thread for the good of all.

Being a little sore the next day, but not bone-crushing-ache style, is fine. It just means you are steadily improving. Or have a hilarious iron deficiency, either or. But odds are it is from extending muscles/joints past their normal range and them telling you to fuck off while they recover. Not -really- good, but not exactly bad either. Aiming to be somewhat sore, but not "ow I can't walk downstairs!" after every workout isn't wrong. But totally expect that shit to fall off after awhile, as you will eventually just get into "Out of energy for the day" mode and after 2 days you'll be back to something resembling prime. Until you get up there in age, then the recovery time starts to lengthen out.

Genjiro_sl said:

I feel if Im not sore I didnt workout hard enough.

Click to expand...

Genjiro_sl said:

Yea because thats what I said. Try and contain your dumb shit to the NFL thread for the good of all.

Click to expand...

derp derp derp

Ambiturner_sl said:

derp derp derp

Click to expand...

Consider this. Perhaps the goal is to have an effective workout, not to be sore, but soreness is a useful indicator of an effective workout. Derp derp indeed.

Papashlapa_sl said:

Consider this. Perhaps the goal is to have an effective workout, not to be sore, but soreness is a useful indicator of an effective workout. Derp derp indeed.

Click to expand...

He wouldnt get it, hes just trolling like he does in every thread.

I even mentioned in the exact same post how I do super slows, and how it will always make you sore due to DOMS being almost entirely associated with the eccentric parts of those lifts (multiplied by more than doubling this part of the lift). But maybe this random troll on the internet is right and the guy who was my exercise phys professor (who was one of the heads of the S&C program at Florida State and was the head of sports medicine for the USTA) taught me wrong and could come by and learn from Ambit.

Workout frequency, volume, intensity, type of training being variable from person to person means there are some out there who are never sore, and some who are always sore. For instance, I know a Crossfit guy who competes and since he is trying to pack in maximal reps and limit the eccentric to as little as possible, he is rarely ever sore working out. It works for him and he's shredded as can be, but Im not a crossfit guy since its more like a cult to me, but to each their own. I also know a lady who was a pro bodybuilder and won a bunch of competitions and mentioned the exact opposite about soreness -- but she was a proponent of always incorporating super slows with 10-12s reps which is going to to bring on about 100000000% more DOMS.

Papashlapa_sl said:

Consider this. Perhaps the goal is to have an effective workout, not to be sore, butsoreness is a useful indicator of an effective workout. Derp derp indeed.

Click to expand...

You can consider that, but you'd be wrong.

Muscle damage and muscle remodeling: no pain, no gain? | Journal of Experimental Biology

But please, continue with your bro science.

Uh, the people doing the acclimated exercise in that study still charted soreness after every workout. It's not high, but it's not 0.

So for the argument at hand, that study doesn't contribute anything interesting. Except that when you start a new exercise without slowly warming up to it, your initial soreness is higher until you acclimate, which is roughly the same as the time the acclimated group had in preparing for it. Which is why when people get back into lifting or start lifting, they get super sore for the first couple of weeks. Which I don't think anyone is arguing about or talking about at this point.

If you feel a little sore after a workout, as the study provides, then it's probably a good indicator that you have stressed the muscles. What that study -is- saying, is that you don't have to go through DOMS in the long run, but if you start lifting from scratch instead of ramping up, expect to get them.

Literally exactly what bro-science says.

Just so you don't think I didn't read the article that doesn't contradict the idea that soreness after a workout is an indicator of a workout,

You might want to read that again. Using soreness as an indicator for the quality of a workout is exactly what the study was about.

It found no correlation between the 2.

No, rates soreness is not an indicator of the quality of the workout. But not being sore is an indicator that you did not work out enough. So when you get sore, it means that you have worked out enough to get something out of it. Whether being more or less sore is irrelevant, as the study proves. But if you gauge the quality of your workout by being sore or not, it's a pretty good indicator. If you did not get sore at all, you did not work out enough. Which the study sort of glosses over completely. It's almost entirely based around muscle damage and DOMS being unnecessary, but it doesn't state anywhere that if you are not sore you might have still gotten in a good workout.

Your stance would have legs if there were some charted 0 soreness points. The study doesn't directly relate results to soreness vs. non-soreness, which is kind of the deal at hand. If you get sore after a workout, it's a good indicator you at least stressed the muscle. If you do not get sore after a workout, then it's up in the air whether you pushed it hard enough or not.