20 year old girl wanting to gain muscle, need advice!
Replies
-
ScottJTyler wrote: »Starting to see a trend in MFP forums.
Q. I've got a question about hypertrophy training
A1. Do Stronglifts 5x5
A2. Yeah I agree with that guy or maybe do Wendler
A3. Why not do something other than strength training?
A4. 'NO YOU'RE WRONG 5x5 IS THE BEST FOR EVERYTHING'
Any other suggestion or criticism of beginner programs gets shot down by regulars.
You're all very, very established on these forums and have spouted the same stuff for so long you don't want someone coming in and telling you that something else could be better. Fine, good luck to you. You've chased me out.
Please point out where other program suggestions were "shot down". If anyone was doing any "shooting down" it was you.
And honestly, I don't even think you know what you were saying. Everything you started in on and tried to provide evidence for ended up actually working against you.
It's not that no one is open to ideas, but they for sure will question it and research into it.
If anyone is being close-minded, it really is you. You refuse to accept that maybe, just maybe, you have it completely wrong or/and don't actually understand what you are trying to pass off.
0 -
Wait...is that... a regular shooting something down?
You also did not actually recommend a program...just spreading what she is doing...no note or suggestions re progression of specificity ..just..coz volume apparently trumps errything, and muscle gains are only limited to the volume you can get in...errr..but frequency too.
True I should have thought up and written down a whole progression plan. Mesocycles, deloads, the lot. Then I could go round and help her re rack the weights, cook her meals, etc.
I'm giving simple advice on a forum. That advice is: more frequency.
Waiting for stock reply "LOL, you're wrong!"-3 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »Wait...is that... a regular shooting something down?
You also did not actually recommend a program...just spreading what she is doing...no note or suggestions re progression of specificity ..just..coz volume apparently trumps errything, and muscle gains are only limited to the volume you can get in...errr..but frequency too.
True I should have thought up and written down a whole progression plan. Mesocycles, deloads, the lot. Then I could go round and help her re rack the weights, cook her meals, etc.
I'm giving simple advice on a forum. That advice is: more frequency.
Waiting for stock reply "LOL, you're wrong!"
lol - you are funny.
Also...not sure you are using that term in the right context. Not applying something in the correct context...I sense a theme...
So, you gave her a fantastic advice of ignore a well established beginner program that has progressive overload built in (there's your increase in volume) that has you lifting 3 x a week (there's your frequency) and had recommendations re deload etc, and gave her the stellar advice of 'do it more frequently'.
You see...there is a reason these programs are recommended. Because people do not want/have time to write them for them. You should get that - as you do not want to and are rather bitchy about the fact you do not want to. Even if you do not want to - there are a bunch of split routines that could be recommended if you were bothered.
-1 -
Oh, and hugs and kisses for the flag. Muuuuuuuaaaahhhh!!!-1
-
ScottJTyler wrote: »Wait...is that... a regular shooting something down?
You also did not actually recommend a program...just spreading what she is doing...no note or suggestions re progression of specificity ..just..coz volume apparently trumps errything, and muscle gains are only limited to the volume you can get in...errr..but frequency too.
True I should have thought up and written down a whole progression plan. Mesocycles, deloads, the lot. Then I could go round and help her re rack the weights, cook her meals, etc.
I'm giving simple advice on a forum. That advice is: more frequency.
Waiting for stock reply "LOL, you're wrong!"
From this discussion, it's become obvious that you really don't understand what you are advising.
-1 -
More flags in here than an Independence Day parade...-1
-
The flag system, once again abused. Is there really a point to it?
0 -
-
The flag system, once again abused. Is there really a point to it?
I know!
The rules state:
"Abuse: Use this flag to report extreme abuse of our guidelines; such as posting of pornographic images or hate speech......Items marked for abuse should be both severe and urgent"
Some people must have a really funny definition of severe hate speech. Or maybe its porn...
0 -
ScottJTyler wrote: »Wait...is that... a regular shooting something down?
You also did not actually recommend a program...just spreading what she is doing...no note or suggestions re progression of specificity ..just..coz volume apparently trumps errything, and muscle gains are only limited to the volume you can get in...errr..but frequency too.
True I should have thought up and written down a whole progression plan. Mesocycles, deloads, the lot. Then I could go round and help her re rack the weights, cook her meals, etc.
I'm giving simple advice on a forum. That advice is: more frequency.
Waiting for stock reply "LOL, you're wrong!"
Much flaming going on0 -
This content has been removed.
-
0 -
This content has been removed.
-
-
JeffseekingV wrote: »BusyRaeNOTBusty wrote: »I agree that Stronglifts and Starting Strength are not hypertrophy programs. They are great, don't get me wrong, but for a 104 pound girl who wants to add mass it's going to be really hard to do so. Stronglifts might work for adding mass for a 20 year old dude eating 4000 calories a day, but not for a woman. She needs every extra advantage she can get, and that would be a hypertrophy specific program. When I was bulking I did an upper/lower body split, which I've read is slightly better than body part splits (which are really only needed by the very advanced). And an upper/lower split allows you to lift more than 3 times a week (which you are limited to with a full body), which is again advantages for gaining (I think). I don't know of a specific published program though. Let me see what I can find.
Interested in what you come up with
I know there are others but this was easiest to fine and is similar to what I did.
http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showthread.php?t=1696
I'm no expert though.0 -
For anyone actually interested, this is a pretty good article regarding 'optimal' rep ranges.
http://www.aworkoutroutine.com/optimal-workout-volume/
"In the most simple and basic of terms, the optimal volume range for most people is:
For each bigger muscle group: about 60-120 total reps PER WEEK.
For each smaller muscle group: about 30-60 total reps PER WEEK."
Also note:
"If you are a beginner with ANY goal (building muscle, increasing strength, losing fat, etc.), then you will do best staying in the lowest end of the volume range."
It does not cite anything but is in line with Lyle McDonald's recommendations of:
Large muscle groups: 40-60 reps
Small muscle groups: 20-30
For a 2 x a week routine - so total reps per week = 80 - 120 for large muscle groups and 40 - 60 for small a week.
He also references cross-over. For example, if you get the 120 reps for bench, you do not need to do 60 reps for delts - you already have worked them to a large degree by benching.
So this is not a total appeal to authority, I will try to dig around to find his write up on it.
0 -
Link to Lyle's commentary noted above.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/training/categories-of-weight-training-part-4.html/
0 -
Man- Look what I missed out living in dance land for the last few days. This was fun. darnit.0
-
ScottJTyler wrote: »Wait...is that... a regular shooting something down?
You also did not actually recommend a program...just spreading what she is doing...no note or suggestions re progression of specificity ..just..coz volume apparently trumps errything, and muscle gains are only limited to the volume you can get in...errr..but frequency too.
True I should have thought up and written down a whole progression plan. Mesocycles, deloads, the lot. Then I could go round and help her re rack the weights, cook her meals, etc.
I'm giving simple advice on a forum. That advice is: more frequency.
Waiting for stock reply "LOL, you're wrong!"
So... you state that volume is king, but you recommend increasing frequency through splitting up the current routine? Did I miss something? Wouldn't volume be held constant then?0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »ScottJTyler wrote: »Wait...is that... a regular shooting something down?
You also did not actually recommend a program...just spreading what she is doing...no note or suggestions re progression of specificity ..just..coz volume apparently trumps errything, and muscle gains are only limited to the volume you can get in...errr..but frequency too.
True I should have thought up and written down a whole progression plan. Mesocycles, deloads, the lot. Then I could go round and help her re rack the weights, cook her meals, etc.
I'm giving simple advice on a forum. That advice is: more frequency.
Waiting for stock reply "LOL, you're wrong!"
So... you state that volume is king, but you recommend increasing frequency through splitting up the current routine? Did I miss something? Wouldn't volume be held constant then?
He is comparing it to SL for example.
What he has continually been ignoring/missing/whatever, is that after a certain amount of reps throughout a period, more volume becomes useless for muscle growth and ends up counter-productive due to fatigue (i.e. you will not build less muscle directly from excessive volume, but you fatigue yourself more for no additional benefit, which is not a good thing).
For example, his argument is that 300 reps over a week > 100 reps as you get 300 reps 'worth of muscle growth' v 100 reps 'worth of muscle growth' - this is just not correct, and double not correct for women. There is a cap on how much muscle you can grow over a certain period and you just cannot force more by more volume/frequency/reps.
Hence my comment of more is not always better, which he categorically disagreed with.
0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »ScottJTyler wrote: »Wait...is that... a regular shooting something down?
You also did not actually recommend a program...just spreading what she is doing...no note or suggestions re progression of specificity ..just..coz volume apparently trumps errything, and muscle gains are only limited to the volume you can get in...errr..but frequency too.
True I should have thought up and written down a whole progression plan. Mesocycles, deloads, the lot. Then I could go round and help her re rack the weights, cook her meals, etc.
I'm giving simple advice on a forum. That advice is: more frequency.
Waiting for stock reply "LOL, you're wrong!"
So... you state that volume is king, but you recommend increasing frequency through splitting up the current routine? Did I miss something? Wouldn't volume be held constant then?
He is comparing it to SL for example.
What he has continually been ignoring/missing/whatever, is that after a certain amount of reps throughout a period, more volume becomes useless for muscle growth and ends up counter-productive due to fatigue (i.e. you will not build less muscle directly from excessive volume, but you fatigue yourself more for no additional benefit, which is not a good thing).
For example, his argument is that 300 reps over a week > 100 reps as you get 300 reps 'worth of muscle growth' v 100 reps 'worth of muscle growth' - this is just not correct, and double not correct for women. There is a cap on how much muscle you can grow over a certain period and you just cannot force more by more volume/frequency/reps.
Hence my comment of more is not always better, which he categorically disagreed with.
Sure, I understand. Train smarter not harder.
0 -
maybe increase your fat intake by 5%? You're getting enough protein it seems and also, increase your calories by 200 or so every 2 weeks until you find the amount that helps you gain weight. Also pay attention to what calorie amount you need to maintain so when you're ready to do that you can go back to that calorie amount without worrying about much.0
-
LolBroScience wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »ScottJTyler wrote: »Wait...is that... a regular shooting something down?
You also did not actually recommend a program...just spreading what she is doing...no note or suggestions re progression of specificity ..just..coz volume apparently trumps errything, and muscle gains are only limited to the volume you can get in...errr..but frequency too.
True I should have thought up and written down a whole progression plan. Mesocycles, deloads, the lot. Then I could go round and help her re rack the weights, cook her meals, etc.
I'm giving simple advice on a forum. That advice is: more frequency.
Waiting for stock reply "LOL, you're wrong!"
So... you state that volume is king, but you recommend increasing frequency through splitting up the current routine? Did I miss something? Wouldn't volume be held constant then?
He is comparing it to SL for example.
What he has continually been ignoring/missing/whatever, is that after a certain amount of reps throughout a period, more volume becomes useless for muscle growth and ends up counter-productive due to fatigue (i.e. you will not build less muscle directly from excessive volume, but you fatigue yourself more for no additional benefit, which is not a good thing).
For example, his argument is that 300 reps over a week > 100 reps as you get 300 reps 'worth of muscle growth' v 100 reps 'worth of muscle growth' - this is just not correct, and double not correct for women. There is a cap on how much muscle you can grow over a certain period and you just cannot force more by more volume/frequency/reps.
Hence my comment of more is not always better, which he categorically disagreed with.
Sure, I understand. Train smarter not harder.
Yep. A point that seems to be sorely missed by him.
I know you 'get it', but was trying to explain what I was trying to say in a different way as he just was not getting it, at all. Train smarter not harder sums it up.
0 -
LolBroScience wrote: »LolBroScience wrote: »ScottJTyler wrote: »Wait...is that... a regular shooting something down?
You also did not actually recommend a program...just spreading what she is doing...no note or suggestions re progression of specificity ..just..coz volume apparently trumps errything, and muscle gains are only limited to the volume you can get in...errr..but frequency too.
True I should have thought up and written down a whole progression plan. Mesocycles, deloads, the lot. Then I could go round and help her re rack the weights, cook her meals, etc.
I'm giving simple advice on a forum. That advice is: more frequency.
Waiting for stock reply "LOL, you're wrong!"
So... you state that volume is king, but you recommend increasing frequency through splitting up the current routine? Did I miss something? Wouldn't volume be held constant then?
He is comparing it to SL for example.
What he has continually been ignoring/missing/whatever, is that after a certain amount of reps throughout a period, more volume becomes useless for muscle growth and ends up counter-productive due to fatigue (i.e. you will not build less muscle directly from excessive volume, but you fatigue yourself more for no additional benefit, which is not a good thing).
For example, his argument is that 300 reps over a week > 100 reps as you get 300 reps 'worth of muscle growth' v 100 reps 'worth of muscle growth' - this is just not correct, and double not correct for women. There is a cap on how much muscle you can grow over a certain period and you just cannot force more by more volume/frequency/reps.
Hence my comment of more is not always better, which he categorically disagreed with.
Sure, I understand. Train smarter not harder.
Yep. A point that seems to be sorely missed by him.
I know you 'get it', but was trying to explain what I was trying to say in a different way as he just was not getting it, at all. Train smarter not harder sums it up.
All good! I didn't read through the entire thread since I had seen too many derpy comments by him. I missed the context huehuehuheuhehuhe.
0 -
JeffseekingV wrote: »jaimesparkman wrote: »
what muscle group am I missing?rainbowbow wrote: »Two things:
One, eat more. Obviously you're eating at maintenance or you'd be gaining. Try to up the calls by 200/week until you start gaining at an appropriate level.
Two, I'd look into a better lifting plan. By reading the description it looks like you're missing out on whole muscle groups? This isn't the time to wing it though, finding a balanced lifting plan is important because it's really easy to forget certain muscles (especially ones we can't see).
What day do you do back?
Technically dead work the back but yes, she doesn't seem to dedicate a specific day to other back exercises besides deads.JeffseekingV wrote: »jaimesparkman wrote: »
what muscle group am I missing?rainbowbow wrote: »Two things:
One, eat more. Obviously you're eating at maintenance or you'd be gaining. Try to up the calls by 200/week until you start gaining at an appropriate level.
Two, I'd look into a better lifting plan. By reading the description it looks like you're missing out on whole muscle groups? This isn't the time to wing it though, finding a balanced lifting plan is important because it's really easy to forget certain muscles (especially ones we can't see).
What day do you do back?
Technically dead work the back but yes, she doesn't seem to dedicate a specific day to other back exercises besides deads.
Yeah, but deads are only lower back. I'm thinking middle back and lats, specifically. I don't see a day that would incorporate either unless she does rows as a pull on chest day and pull ups a pull on shoulders.
No, the specific primary muscles used in a deadlift are the erector spinae, gluteus maximus, quadriceps, hamstring complex and adductors. The secondary or stabilizing muscles used are the trapezius, rhomboids, flexors, extensors, serratus anterior, rectus abdominus, transverse abdominus, gluteus medius/minimus, soleus and the gastrocnemius.
Technically.
0 -
I see someone found teh googlz0
-
Relentless_0ne wrote: »JeffseekingV wrote: »jaimesparkman wrote: »
what muscle group am I missing?rainbowbow wrote: »Two things:
One, eat more. Obviously you're eating at maintenance or you'd be gaining. Try to up the calls by 200/week until you start gaining at an appropriate level.
Two, I'd look into a better lifting plan. By reading the description it looks like you're missing out on whole muscle groups? This isn't the time to wing it though, finding a balanced lifting plan is important because it's really easy to forget certain muscles (especially ones we can't see).
What day do you do back?
Technically dead work the back but yes, she doesn't seem to dedicate a specific day to other back exercises besides deads.JeffseekingV wrote: »jaimesparkman wrote: »
what muscle group am I missing?rainbowbow wrote: »Two things:
One, eat more. Obviously you're eating at maintenance or you'd be gaining. Try to up the calls by 200/week until you start gaining at an appropriate level.
Two, I'd look into a better lifting plan. By reading the description it looks like you're missing out on whole muscle groups? This isn't the time to wing it though, finding a balanced lifting plan is important because it's really easy to forget certain muscles (especially ones we can't see).
What day do you do back?
Technically dead work the back but yes, she doesn't seem to dedicate a specific day to other back exercises besides deads.
Yeah, but deads are only lower back. I'm thinking middle back and lats, specifically. I don't see a day that would incorporate either unless she does rows as a pull on chest day and pull ups a pull on shoulders.
No, the specific primary muscles used in a deadlift are the erector spinae, gluteus maximus, quadriceps, hamstring complex and adductors. The secondary or stabilizing muscles used are the trapezius, rhomboids, flexors, extensors, serratus anterior, rectus abdominus, transverse abdominus, gluteus medius/minimus, soleus and the gastrocnemius.
Technically.
And?0 -
Relentless_0ne wrote: »JeffseekingV wrote: »jaimesparkman wrote: »
what muscle group am I missing?rainbowbow wrote: »Two things:
One, eat more. Obviously you're eating at maintenance or you'd be gaining. Try to up the calls by 200/week until you start gaining at an appropriate level.
Two, I'd look into a better lifting plan. By reading the description it looks like you're missing out on whole muscle groups? This isn't the time to wing it though, finding a balanced lifting plan is important because it's really easy to forget certain muscles (especially ones we can't see).
What day do you do back?
Technically dead work the back but yes, she doesn't seem to dedicate a specific day to other back exercises besides deads.JeffseekingV wrote: »jaimesparkman wrote: »
what muscle group am I missing?rainbowbow wrote: »Two things:
One, eat more. Obviously you're eating at maintenance or you'd be gaining. Try to up the calls by 200/week until you start gaining at an appropriate level.
Two, I'd look into a better lifting plan. By reading the description it looks like you're missing out on whole muscle groups? This isn't the time to wing it though, finding a balanced lifting plan is important because it's really easy to forget certain muscles (especially ones we can't see).
What day do you do back?
Technically dead work the back but yes, she doesn't seem to dedicate a specific day to other back exercises besides deads.
Yeah, but deads are only lower back. I'm thinking middle back and lats, specifically. I don't see a day that would incorporate either unless she does rows as a pull on chest day and pull ups a pull on shoulders.
No, the specific primary muscles used in a deadlift are the erector spinae, gluteus maximus, quadriceps, hamstring complex and adductors. The secondary or stabilizing muscles used are the trapezius, rhomboids, flexors, extensors, serratus anterior, rectus abdominus, transverse abdominus, gluteus medius/minimus, soleus and the gastrocnemius.
Technically.
good job confirming that the OP needs more back work.0 -
The flag system, once again abused. Is there really a point to it?
I know!
The rules state:
"Abuse: Use this flag to report extreme abuse of our guidelines; such as posting of pornographic images or hate speech......Items marked for abuse should be both severe and urgent"
Some people must have a really funny definition of severe hate speech. Or maybe its porn...
I don't know. I'm starting to get aroused reading all this...
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 424 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions