Position papers referenced by AA above.

On caffeine as an ergogenic aid: http://www.jissn.com/content/7/1/5

Bolded what may be interesting or practical


As an aside, the last bullet point dove-tails with the absurd claims promulgated by the newsletter of the guy who wrote that book on "natural hormones" linked above

http://w3.newsmax.com/newsletters/br...ve_health1.cfm

Aidan reading Chaos and Pain writing about Reading Bodybuilding Mags So You Dont Have To, so you don't have to.

• Occlusion Training
  
  We've briefly discussed this before I think, but it is the principle of tying a moderate tourniquet at the limb insertion point prior to training. A recent study on semi-pro rugby players training using a thigh cuff using 5x5 squats, bench and pullups at 70% 1RM using a crossover design showed greater increases in squat, bench, sprint speed and leg power, as well as salivary test spikes from those using the cuffs over three weeks.
  
  A possible caveat appears to be a possible increase in risk of rhabdo - a case report (that I dont have full access to, just the first page) suggests that a hockey player got rhabdo after doing 1x30 and then 4x15 single leg extensions with a 100mmhg thigh cuff. Not great evidence though.
  
  There are a bunch of other studies on pubmed that I'd like to look at to see what other effects and training conditions it has been assessed with.
  
  
• Sleep is important, yo
  
  A big associative study in japan correlates lack of sleep with being a fatty.
  
  Sleep timing may modulate T levels. "However, total sleep deprivation and 4·5 h of sleep restricted to the first night-half markedly decreased morning T and PRL concentrations (both P ≤ 0·05)."
  
  
• Is there a practical upper limit to the anabolic response to protein or amino acid intake in the context of a meal?
  
  No. The more protein you eat, the more anabolic the meal is.
  
  
• Effect of music on training.
  
  Motivational music may help improve recovery from some types of exertion, and may reduce perceived exertion and increased rate of force production, (but not 1RM strength).
  
  
• Drink moar coffee
  
  Probably covered somewhere in AB's post above, but a recent study on overweight smokers showed that 30oz of caffeinated coffee a day resulted in significant increases in free T, possibly by acting as an aromatase inhibitor. Decent randomised crossover study, small sample size though.
  
  
• Full ROM is king
  
  Longer range of motion = more mechanical stress and more adaptation than shorter range of motion with higher load, and your gains last longer after a layoff with long ROM movements.
  
  
• Double biceps pose = GAINZ
  
  Trainees maximally co-contracted biceps and triceps at 90degrees for 4s on/4s off for 5 sets of ten, three days a week and saw strength and thickness increases.
  
  
• Soy protein will lower your test spike PWO
  
  Their main findings demonstrate that 14 days of supplementation with soy protein does appear to partially blunt serum testosterone. In addition, whey influences the response of cortisol following an acute bout of resistance exercise by blunting its increase during recovery.
  
  

Lots of good stuff there, thanks! Does Is there a practical upper limit to the anabolic response to protein or amino acid intake in the context of a meal? translate to "eating 100g in one sitting is just as effective as eating 25g in 4 sittings?" I wouldn't mind seeing some stuff supporting that.

Same for the double bicep thing.

Also, not sure if this is HC enough or not, but I wouldn't mind seeing some kind of stuff about who's got a good blog, YT channel, magazines, whatever.

Examine.com has a good section about the 100g in one sitting vs 4 25g meals. Cliffs are it doesnt appear to matter, your body will still likely absorb the protein.

7/8. Recommendations for kneewraps?

I this thread.
That's all I got to say.

This occlusion training stuff is interesting to me, mostly from a scientific perspective versus practical application. Still I find myself wondering if wrapping voodoo bands around my elbows and doing wrist curls will give me huge forearms.

Kind of a rambling article by Rippetoe up today on t-nation: http://www.t-nation.com/training/the...d-the-deadlift

I've always felt that a 4 inch belt is slightly too wide for my short torso. I just don't have that much clearance between my ribs and my hip bones. And I never DL in a belt because I can't seem to brace my abs into the belt and maintain lumbar extension because my ribs get in the way.

Anyway, does anyone have any experience with narrower belts? It seems that there's a handful of options between 2 and 3 inches wide:

http://www.bestbelts.net/Powerliftin...Inch-Belt.aspx
http://www.bobsbelts.com/ (not currently taking orders)
http://www.flexcart.com/members/elit...d=299&pid=5854
http://www.titansupport.com/products...ench-belt.html
http://www.liftinglarge.com/Economy-Lever-Bench-Belt
http://www.crain.ws/power_belts.html
http://www.ironcompany.com/6mm-thick...x#.UzmHLvldWYI

etc.

I think I'm leaning towards getting a 2.5 inch lever one like the one from ironcompany (since my 4 inch G4S hand me down is a double prong and I'd like to try a lever).

Any opinions?

My experience with wrapping voodoo bands and doing resistance stuff (mostly this is doing GHRs with either calves or upper legs wrapped tight) is that it works very well for loosening up tight crap. I know from experience you get great blood flow in the area that was wrapped after removing the band. I have no opinion on the rest of that.

I set my back at the top when I DL. I think this is the best way to set your back properly. Because of that, a 4" belt works great for me.

A lot of the stuff in that article is good. And if you're never going to change your DL setup from setting up at the bottom, maybe Rip is right about using a narrower belt. But I think that's not an optimal DL setup for getting your back set properly.

I stopped pulling with a belt. Setting up top or at the bottom never really mattered to me. Always shifted the belt so it slid up my back.

I think he's prob right and it's prob why some weightlifters use narrower belts.

I also know the spud deadlift is pretty popular and though it's not narrow, its appeal is that it's less rigid and stays in the right spot.

Interesting. I may have to try the Spud women's belt (lol @ me) because the sizing seems a little more forgiving and I'm not positive the men's medium would fit me when I'm at my fattest.

http://www.flexcart.com/members/elit...&m=PD&pid=6118

I have a 3" best belt. Its a really nice belt but I get way less out of it than my 4" belt. And since its narrower it pinches the hell out of me as well. The spud belt looks good but it's not legal for any feds that I have seen

More please:

Accessory work: One arm at a time or both? I was raised on barbells so I do two at a time but I almost never see people using dumbbells and moving both arms at once.

I'm going to worry about fed legality if I ever become not pathetic. Granted that's a constantly moving target, but right now I don't have any desire to compete unless I have a chance to break some milestone, like squatting 400 or deadlifting 500.

I see no reason to go and total somewhere between 1000 and 1030 and get killed by some mongoloid who totals 1250.

Probably a tiny rock.

Alternating unilateral work yields more TuT and lets you devote more concentration to one limb at a time. So it is probably marginally better for catching a pump and getting swole, ie marathon DB curl sets.

Bilateral work more closely mimics actual barbell movements. So it might be a wiser choice if you're trying to round out an imbalance and are basically duplicating the barbell movement with DBs so that the weak side is forced to do its own work. IE heavy low rep sets of DB bench press as an accessory movement.

There's also a school (Mike Boyle) that thinks unilateral work has a real place in strength programming. IIRC from college, there is some evidence to support the idea that some neural efficiency is lost when we ask our bodies to perform a heavy bilateral movement. But IMO this doesn't translate well to the real world because unilateral work is less significantly stable than bilateral work. I guess if you were doing a max effort bench press in a smith machine you'd probably find that even if you maxed at 200 lbs with both hands you could probably do a little bit more than 100 lbs with one hand because you could devote more attention to that one side. Obviously this has greatly limited applications.

In short if you're doing the exercise to build size and are putting a premium on technique, tempo, quality of muscle contraction, pump, all that good bodybuilding stuff, then alternating unilateral or even pure unilateral work (like concentration curls) is the default for a reason. But it doesn't matter a ton.

Have you tried wearing the belt higher on your torso when deadlifting?

Maybe not as high as Stan in the video within the video, but here's mark bell rambling on about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4B3...tailpage#t=501

Looking up the guys he mentions will give you a better idea.

I have tried it, and it feels different but good.

Don't sprinters, jumpers etc. also generally do a lot of unilateral movements in their strength training? Would the asymmetric positions used in their sports (eg. start of sprint or the beginning of the jump) make unilateral work more beneficial compared to eg. powerlifter, whose sport only requires symmetric position? I don't even english, so but I hope you can understand what I'm trying to ask.

DF2, my wife had a 3" belt from best belts, then bought another to size down just before we left the US. I can't possibly give them a more glowing review, though i think they are made to order so can be 2-3 weeks to get.

What DFII says.

Also: Sometimes doing unilateral stuff helps strengthen your core. 1 am rows or presses or offset step ups or lunges are some examples of exercises that work your core differently than bilateral exercises.

I will have to try this. It seems counter productive because I have a lot less oblique musculature higher up so I'm not sure I can really drive my core outwards into the belt, but I'm not really sure.

For sure. But Boyle takes it a step farther and says any heavy bilateral leg work is a waste of time. According to him all that matters is the unilateral load, and stuff like heaviest systematic stress and range of motion are secondary concerns. Which is why he's an idiot.

Unilateral work can definitely be defended, especially for sport-specific training, but IMO you cannot defend saying that bilateral work is useless.

Cool, good to know. I think I'm still leaning towards the spud though.

Pummi, to gain muscle in the long term you either need to increase strength, or work capacity, or both. The largest increases in musculature likely result from some combination of improving both qualities, though this is mostly conjecture. But due to diminishing marginal returns of any form of training it seems like you can devote 100% of your efforts to strength, resulting in a strength gain of 100, or 100% of your efforts to work capacity, resulting in a work capacity gain of 100, or split the training 50/50 which results in a gain to both strength and work capacity of something greater than 50, maybe like 75.

Now increased work capacity is largely a function of not being a bitch and doing stuff that sucks. IMO it can be achieved (at least in the 2 year timeline that you're talking about) while on a deficit.

Increased strength however is much more programming/diet dependent. Beyond the beginning stages (say the first 6 months) it is probably unlikely that one will see significant strength gains at any point while on a deficit.

So hopefully this illustrates that this isn't just a frequency of bulking/cutting problem, it is also a programming problem.

A lot of factors will influence optimal frequency of bulk/cut for each individual. Ability to retain strength while on a deficit and rate of strength gain while on a bulk probably being the two most important. And both of these are largely dependent on how advanced the trainee is. Beginners tend to see large swings in strength as a result of caloric consumption, while more advanced trainees tend to struggle to progress on a surplus but also retain more strength while on a cut.

I'm not sure I've articulated my thought process well to this point, but from a purely aesthetic perspective I believe optimal bulking/cutting over a couple of years may look something like:

16 week bulk, 8 week cut, 12 week bulk, 6 week cut, 8 week bulk, 4 week cut, 6 week bulk, 3 week cut, 4 week bulk, 2 week cut, 3 week bulk, 1 week cut, etc.

While bulking you should be pushing a lot of heavy sets of 5 on full rest and heavy sets of 8-10 on shorter rest to maximize strength gains and take advantage of low hanging work capacity increasing fruit as well.

While cutting you should be pushing a few heavy sets of 3-5 on full rest, and filling out the rest of workouts with as much work capacity stuff as possible. Whether that be through circuits, supersets, metabolic conditioning, interval training, crossfit, etc is probably up to the individual. But the goal of this block is to do what you can to retain strength but increase the total amount of work done/poundage moved every week.

Thanks a bunch for typing all that, Doug.
That is exactly why I (still) 2+2 and especially H&F.

What you wrote seems to be very much in line what my intuition says and what I've gathered from posters who I consider knowledgeable (you obv. included), here and on other forums.
I personally couldn't have articulated it that well, ever.

Probably also need to read it a few more times to really digest it all.

Rant in spoilers:

This is probably more suited for Beginner's Questions but since we're on a similar topic of bulk/cut cycles and strength /work rate gains, I might as well mention this here.

In a linear SS type program, is it necessary that every week 2kg must be added to your main lifts? I mean necessary as in, if you aren't able to add 2kg every week and keep good form etc, could it be some problem like - diet, rest, having too much work load with accessory stuff, not having full focus etc?
Since the early days, I have not been able to add weight every week.

So far what I have experienced is 2-3 weeks of having to keep same weight and then sudden bursts where the added 2kg goes smoothly. Then perhaps 2 more weeks of struggling with it and then again a relatively easy progression to two more kgs.

Also, it's not like I have a week where there is no weight progression at all. There will be progression in say Bench Press but not in the OHP of the same week. Next week I might be able to progress in squats but not in the others. 3rd week I am able to add to OHP but not Bench or Squats

Is this quite normal?

Yes, that's normal.

Rippetoe would say that once you make your 3x5 you should immediately be adding weight even if it means only getting 3, 3, 2 next time. His argument is that once you make a weight for 3x5 that subsequent successful completions of 3x5 won't contribute any new strength because the adaptation that allows you to do the 3x5 in the first place has already taken place. I think per his general audience making a claim like this isn't bad, even though it is obviously wrong.

Anyways there are ways that you can get a bit more out of your programming as progress slows down. One of the more common ones is to go AMRAP on the last set. So say you benched 175x5x3 but you didn't feel ready yet to try 180. Next time you could do 175x5x2 and then 1 set of 175xMax (which stands to reason will be greater than 5), which will be a slightly stronger stimulus than just doing 175x5x3.

The other thing you could experiment with is microloading. You can buy very large washers from McMaster-Carr (http://www.mcmaster.com/#91081a046/=re0cy5) that fit on standard barbells. That way instead of making 5# jumps you can make 1.25# jumps.