WMA vs. Western Weight Training.

[Jeff Hansen]

"I got sick of Jeff Hansen folding me in half! So I got bigger."

Jake,
Sounds like I've got my work cut out for me when you get back.
I can't wait.

[JeffGentry]

Jake

CW You should also know that you should fight a weak opponent first with strength and an equal opponent simultaneously with reach, and should let a strong opponent attack first and fight him with agility.



Firoe 7 thing's

Strength, speed, knowledge, that is knowledge of binds of advantage, knowing how to fracture, that is how to break arms and legs, knowing binds, that is how to bind arms so that the man has no defense anymore, and cannot leave freely, and knowing how to injure the most dangerous points. also knowing how to put someone on the ground, without danger to himself. Also knowing how to dislocate arms and leg's in diffrent ways.

Ott 3 thing's

Skill, quickness, proper application of strength.

There are three from diffrent book's for yea Jake.

Jeff

[ElizabethPangerl]

[Portions snipped]

Elizabeth,

It's not utter nonsense, true. But it would be for some of us.

I bench 300lbs (on a good day, LOL). I'm a big guy...But you're absolutely right that at certain stages and for certain purposes a 5-lb weight will get the job done. I think that one point we se appearing over and over again is that you need to train for your desired end-state.
...Why not use any tool available to get better? That means 5-lb weights and, if it will help you, 300-lb weights.

Jake

-----

Jake,

I completely agree with your comments that you need to train for your desired end state and that any available tool should work. 5 lb weights would be as pointless for you as a 300 lb weight would be for me (except maybe as furniture).

I had a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to a prior post (not yours) that appeared to take a mocking tone to the use of 3-5 pound weights for weight training. I just wanted to point out that not everyone here is physically capable of the heavier weights and that shouldn't be a point of ridicule as it doesn't negate the sincerity of effort behind their strength training.

Thanks for putting it more clearly. To reference another thread, maybe I should be training with someone like you in mind.

- Elizabeth

[Andrzej Rosa]

I had a bit of a knee-jerk reaction to a prior post (not yours) that appeared to take a mocking tone to the use of 3-5 pound weights for weight training.

Could be my post.

I just wanted to point out that not everyone here is physically capable of the heavier weights

I doubt it.

and that shouldn't be a point of ridicule as it doesn't negate the sincerity of effort behind their strength training.

Why not ridicule ridiculous "weights" used for _weight_ training?

3-5lb can be fine if you put it at the end of 1 meter long lever and/or use it as a part of aerobics workout. Any healthy person between an age of 5 an 75 can safely use heavier weights if they want to develop some strength and power.

My main point is to distinguish between aerobics with added resistance and strength and power training.

Strength and Power is A Good Thing for a fighter.

As far as equipment helpful for traveling person there are better options. First is to simply use no special equipment and make do with bodyweight, your bag, desk, chairs and whatever you will find in a hotel room.
In case someone must carry some equipment to remind themselves that they are supposed to work out I'd recommend elastic bands. Since Louie Simmons nobody will tell you that rubber builds rubber muscles anymore.

Regarding somebody else' remark that strength has very little correlation to size of muscles I challenge him to find small successful Strongman without Big Muscles.

Best Regards.

[david welch]

Regarding somebody else' remark that strength has very little correlation to size of muscles I challenge him to find small successful Strongman without Big Muscles.

Best Regards.

SIZE MEANS STRENGTH?
by Jamie Hale


One day your in the gym and a freak of nature walks in. This guy has massively ripped muscles from head to toe. As you watch the specimen, he approaches the squat rack. You begin to get excited as he loads the bar in the squat rack. You are wondering how much this guy squats. He begins going through his warm-up sets. He starts with 135 and then 225. He puts 295 on the bar and begins his decent. Guess what? He is stuck at the bottom. The next day at the gym you notice a short chubby guy walk in that you have not seen before. You watch as he approaches the squat rack. He begins to go through his warm-up sets. He starts his warm-up sets with 135 then 225 and then 315. You are very suprised. This guys physique development does not even come close to the level of the freaks’ that was in the gym yesterday. This guy is now squatting 405 with ease. Eventually he moves up to 500lbs. for 3 reps. This is a common scenario.

How do we explain the chubby guy squatting more than the lean muscular machine? Another example of this case is the comparison of powerlifters to bodybuilders. There is a noticeable difference in physique development. The bodybuilders show supreme muscular and physique development in comparison to the powerlifters; but powerlifters are usually stronger. There are numerous factors that contribute to the supreme strength displayed by the powerlifter. These factors include mechanical advantages such as limb length and tendon insertions. A higher rate of fast twitch muscle fibers and better neural efficiency can also contribute to the disparity of strength between the two athletes. There are numerous other factors that can affect strength , but we will not discuss these issues any further. Our concern in this article is the size strength relationship. More precisely we will look at sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, and myofibrillar hypertrophy.

Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy (common in bodybuilding) involves the growth of the sarcoplasm (fluid like substance) and non contractile proteins that do not directly contribute to muscular force production. Filament area density decreases while cross-sectional area increases, without a significant increase in strength. Myofibrillar hypertrophy occurs due to an increase in myosin-actin filaments. Contractile proteins are synthesized and filament density increases (Zatsiorsky 1995). This type of hypertrophy leads to increased strength production.

Sarcoplasmic Hypertrophy

Muscle fibers adapt to high volume training by increasing the number of mitochondria ( organelles in the cell that are involved in ATP production) in the cell. This type of training also leads to the elevation of enzymes that are involved in glycolytic and oxidative pathways. The volume of sarcoplasmic fluid inside the cell and between the cells are increased with high volume training. This type of training contributes little to maximal strength while it does increase strength endurance due to mitochondria hypertrophy. Growth of connective tissue is also present with sarcoplasmic hypertrophy.

Myofibrillar Hypertrophy

Myofibrillar hypertrophy occurs due to increases in the number of myosin/actin filaments (sarcomeres) inside the cell. This leads to increased strength and size of the contractile unit of muscle. Ultimately this means greater force production. This is often referred to as functional muscle, while sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is referred to as non-functional muscle.

ATP and Muscular Growth

As we said earlier, increasing the number of mitochondria in the cell means increased ATP production. ATP is required for protein synthesis to occur. Low levels of ATP will halt muscular growth as well as inhibit other metabolic functions that take place inside the muscle cell. Siff and Verkhoshansky have shown that it is possible to increase your muscles contractile unit faster than the mitochondria’s ability to compensate for this growth. When actin/myosin filaments out grow the number of mitochondria, growth of elements besides the sarcomere is inhibited. The insufficient quantity of ATP results in the bodies inability to promote protein synthesis.

Size vs. Strength

In general, bodybuilders are more muscular than powerlifters, but powerlifters are stronger. How does training with weights that are 90% of 1RM develop strength and power, but do very little for hypertrophy? Studies have shown an intense set of 5 reps involves more fibers than an intense set of 1rep. Research has shown that using loads in the 90% range causes failure to occur before a growth stimulus has been sent to the cells. Therefore other factors besides muscle fiber fatigue result in termination of the set. The muscle simply does not have sufficient time under tension to stimulate the growth process. High rep training produces high levels of phosphate and hydrogen Ions which enhance the growth process. Research has shown heavy lifting enhances neural efficiency ( improved motor recruitment, and firing rates) which enhances strength , but does not necessarily result in muscular growth. With this information you can see why the strength, and size levels are different between bodybuilders and powerlifters.

There are powerlifters that possess muscularity comparable to bodybuilders. There are also bodybuilders who have equal or greater strength than powerlifters. Do not misinterpret this article to mean there is no relationship between strength and size. If you gain 30lbs. of lean tissue you will probably become stronger. The basic idea presented in this article is there is a relationship between size and strength , but strength increases can occur due to other reasons. Just as size increase can occur with a non linear strength increase.

References

The weight trainer(2001)Muscle Growth part 1811: Why, And How Does A Muscle Grow and Get Stronger?[online]http://weightrainer.virtualave.net/training/growth/.html
Zatsiorsky,V.(1995) Science and Practice of Strength Training. Human Kinetics.

Jamie Hale author of Optimum Physique and writer for Steele Jungle Publications. Owner of www.halesoptimumphysique.com and Total Body Fitness.

[david welch]

Strength training uses low volume, high intensity workouts. Take all the weight you can lift, and lift it once or twice.

Body builders use a mid intensity, high volume workout. Take a weigh you can lift 8 to 10 times and do 4 to 6 sets. On top of that, body builders eat up to 5-6 thousand calories a day, a lot of that high quality proteins.

A strength training program is not going to turn you into an Arnold Schwarzenegger, and anybody that tells you that it is, is lying to you.

[Andrzej Rosa]

Strength training uses low volume, high intensity workouts. Take all the weight you can lift, and lift it once or twice.

Mariusz Pudzianowski uses sets of 15 and more in his training.

Body builders use a mid intensity, high volume workout. Take a weigh you can lift 8 to 10 times and do 4 to 6 sets.

World class strongmen use even more reps. They are bunch of sacroplasms, I guess.

On top of that, body builders eat up to 5-6 thousand calories a day, a lot of that high quality proteins.

Neither your old time swordsmen nor contemporary powerlifters eat so much of "quality" proteins. Some of them openly laugh at chicken breasts and egg whites.

A strength training program is not going to turn you into an Arnold Schwarzenegger, and anybody that tells you that it is, is lying to you.

Google images search is obviously lying to me.

Best Regards.

[david welch]

People that have the 1:1,000,000 genetics to be world class lifters and strong men have absolutly nothing to do with this conversation and people need to quit trying to derail the conversation by bringing them up. It is crap to tell people that if they work out a couple days a week to increase their strenth for fighting they are going to wind up looking like that so quit it. Especially for the women that need the extra strength but think if they start weight lifting they are going to look like the bodybuilders on sports center. Thanks for going out of your way to keep them from doing what would be in their best interest and hurting their training.

I would dare say there are very very few, if any at all, that could even get to that level here even if they wanted to and did nothing else as a full time profession.

Maryse Turcotte, a high school lifter, lifts 237 lbs at a body weight of 117 lbs

[Andrzej Rosa]

I guess I got your point and can't honestly say you are not right.

I also often find, that women are almost afraid of developing too big muscles. It wasn't my point to discourage them from lifting heavy things.

What I find even funnier, are the measures some of them will go to "simulate" possessing some muscles. Like butt implants, for example or totally main stream practice of using foam shoulder pads in various garments.

But I see no point in telling half truths, like insisting that there is almost no correlation between a size of a muscle and it's strength. It is not true, period.

Besides, there was not a single woman in written history of mankind who managed to get too big and strong overnight. Not even those who lifted their children weighting an order of magnitude more than 3-5lb. Not even those, who lift really big weights managed to get where they are overnight.

And finally, it is extremely easy to correct too much bulk. All it takes is to stop lifting,

Best Regards.
P.S. Most thing you accuse me of writing I never wrote. They may be crap, but they are not my crap.

[Aaron Pynenberg]

This whole conversation has been nothing but redundant remarks made off the cuff by a whole lot of folks. Can we all just agree that we all have diffrent ideas about training, muscle size and growth etc, etc, ad nauseum.

People approach this subject from diffrent angles. This argument is almost getting to the point of mootness, if you scroll back and read it from the begining everything about this subject has been said again and again- there are many good points and interesting ideas made by many of us, but also alot of non-sense and pure conjecture. Lets move on folks- bottom line is there is no magic or special train method-it all boils down to hard work, sacrafice and dedication, improve on weaknesses, (whatever they might be) and improve the whole, nothing more or less- regards, AP

[Jake_Norwood]

Maryse Turcotte, a high school lifter, lifts 237 lbs at a body weight of 117 lbs

That is the coolest thing I've seen all week!

Jake

[Gene Tausk]

David and Andrej:

Both of you knock it off. Now.

[G.MatthewWebb]

Maryse Turcotte, a high school lifter, lifts 237 lbs at a body weight of 117 lbs

That is the coolest thing I've seen all week!

Jake

Agreed! I feel like a real wimp looking at that photo.

Matthew

[Jaron Bernstein]

I am with Aaron here. This thread has covered the ground and gone back to retread it.

[ElizabethPangerl]

This whole conversation has been nothing but redundant remarks made off the cuff by a whole lot of folks. Can we all just agree that we all have diffrent ideas about training, muscle size and growth etc, etc, ad nauseum.

People approach this subject from diffrent angles. This argument is almost getting to the point of mootness, if you scroll back and read it from the begining everything about this subject has been said again and again- there are many good points and interesting ideas made by many of us, but also alot of non-sense and pure conjecture. Lets move on folks- bottom line is there is no magic or special train method-it all boils down to hard work, sacrafice and dedication, improve on weaknesses, (whatever they might be) and improve the whole, nothing more or less- regards, AP

I agree with your statement and I'm glad you put it so succinctly. My point goes along with yours:

Yes, we all all start from different places and we may do things a little differently. Why waste time belittling others for being less healthy, having the "wrong" body type, or not being able to bench/squat x pounds? We're here because we presumably are inspired by a common goal to improve our fencing, not because we passed some physical exam. To ridicule other members takes away time from that common goal and isn't very honorable.

I apologize if I'm being redundant; I apparently wasn't clear enough in a previous post.