Sarcoplasmic Hypertrophy

^
Actually it wasn't directed at you or at anyone in particular.

I think it's pretty clear that training for muscular endurance will give you more muscular endurance. The only problem I see with BB training is that isolation exercises doesn't involve the concerted movement of many muscle groups, which would be useful in a sports-related setting which requires coordinated and efficient movements. So I suppose high-rep compounds would be more useful than curlz and chest flys still.

I think it's also helpful to realize that increases of strength isn't wholly separate from endurance. You can train solely for strength and increase the amount of reps you can do at lower weight.

Of course, these are just generalities and a good understanding of how muscular endurance can be applied will come from an understanding of the different energy systems your body uses. It also may not be worth investigating in the first place because, for most people, simply practicing the technique of whatever sport they're interested in will be the #1 factor in developing the necessary endurance.
 
^
Actually it wasn't directed at you or at anyone in particular.

I think it's pretty clear that training for muscular endurance will give you more muscular endurance. The only problem I see with BB training is that isolation exercises doesn't involve the concerted movement of many muscle groups, which would be useful in a sports-related setting which requires coordinated and efficient movements. So I suppose high-rep compounds would be more useful than curlz and chest flys still.

I think it's also helpful to realize that increases of strength isn't wholly separate from endurance. You can train solely for strength and increase the amount of reps you can do at lower weight.

Of course, these are just generalities and a good understanding of how muscular endurance can be applied will come from an understanding of the different energy systems your body uses. It also may not be worth investigating in the first place because, for most people, simply practicing the technique of whatever sport they're interested in will be the #1 factor in developing the necessary endurance.



Bodybuilding routines mostly don't include isolation, at least the sticky ones on BB.com. It's not like bodybuilders just do curls and other crap, some who aren't good do but most do compound lifts. And lifting for 1.15 hours with about 8 reps and smaller rests should give you more cardio then 5 x 5 with 5-7 minutes inbetween. Hovever it all depends what your looking for, max strength can be a goal if you take care of your sport specific cardio separately.
 
Did it ever occur to you that you can train cardio and strength at the same time. To me this just sounds like some denial coming from Jaedong and Rod1. Jaedong grabbing for anything since he has failed miserably in these forums and rod1 is just illogical and probably in denial.
 
*Sigh*

Bodybuilding is the sport of building large, symmetrical muscles, achieving an especially low body fat %, and then posing on stage to be judged against others who have done the same. While training for this, any increased strength or endurance they achieve is merely a side effect. In other words, bodybuilders goals are purely aesthetic, and if you have goals relating to increased strength, endurance, or any other physical ability, you should train specifically for those instead.

How come? Im not trying to prove that BBs are strong because some of them can lift well, i said specifically that sarcoplasmic hypertrophy and BB range if weights which is around 8-15, can still elicit more strength gains and also give increased endurance.

No, it will not elicit more strength gains than lower rep training, and any increased endurance would be a side effect and not the goal of BB training. So why not train specifically for strength and endurance?

Im not trying to induct anything, im merely pointing out the misconception that only sarcomere hypertrophy is useful.

No, you're trying to jump from the idea that some sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is beneficial, to that bodybuilder training is more beneficial for an athlete who's sport as an element of endurance, which is an absurd conclusion.

The Bulgarian system i took for a month and i quit later, it takes a lot of time, agreed however i only did one session per day.

You never were doing the Bulgarian system. For that matter, following such a system, or smolov, and then complaining your endurance is no good is stupid. If you're not doing conditioning work, of course your endurance is going to suck, it's not the fault of the strength training, and trying to address it as such is retarded.

I thought the same thing. But I remember GSP doing a full body-circuit with mediocre weights (load) but of course there are different ways to be successful and get in shape. For people who don't train combat sports bodybuilders have a better training then powerlifter for fighting but then it doesn't matter since both don't have fighting as goal.

Doing a complex for conditioning work is a far cry from bodybuilding, and drawing a connection between the two is stupid. For that matter, you don't have a clue about how powerlifters do train.

This is also trained during a BB routine because the rest times are lower and HR never really drops from the 60%- 70% for the whole session, while maxing at 90-100% during the most gruesome exercises like 12rm squat.

Yes, because no powerlifter has ever done 20 rep squats...oh wait, lots of them have.

Neither of you seem to realize that many powerlifters do conditioning work, and that powerlifting routines can easily include brutal conditioning work like prowler work, barbell complexes, or strongman circuits. The best conditioned people I know are, in fact, powerlifters.

For that matter, it is recognized here that generally skill > endurance > strength, but no one here is stupid enough to confuse bodybuilding with conditioning.
 

Pwned.jpg
 
So you don't know any MMA fighters then ?

Even better conditioned than any MAers I know are two powerlifters who also row competively, and one guy who due to an injury does a tonne of prowler work.
 
This thread went wrong when it stopped discussing the merits or detriments of sarcoplasmic hypertrophy and started arguing the merits of bodybuilding.

Are there merits to building sarcoplasmic hypertrophy via various 6-20 rep schemes? Yes, lots of them. Many and varied purposes.

The most obvious one is probably contact sports. The body often needs to perform bouts of moderate to high intensity anaerobic work such as tackling, blocking, sprinting, rucking, mauling, scrumming (rugby), checking, jamming, etc... or any combination, WITHOUT long rest periods. If you play these sports you cannot merely get enough efficiency at them by doing them because the resistance will not be scalable and the risk of injury is very very high. THAT is why you perform work that mimics the requirements of those activities in the weight room. And if you are training for that (see: training appropriately for your sport) sarcoplasmic hypertrophy will happen pretty quickly.

If you're a beginner lifter, just stick with the basics. If you just want 1RM strength, you don't need to mess with as much of this. If you're a competitive contact-sport athlete, you will eventually be developing some sarcoplasmic hypertrophy.

Peace
 
To me this just sounds like some denial coming from Jaedong and Rod1. Jaedong grabbing for anything since he has failed miserably in these forums and rod1 is just illogical and probably in denial.


Thanks for writing that so I didn't have to...



And yes, could this discussion please get back on track and away from bodybuilding? It actually started out interesting...
 
I don't understand why so many people seem to think that if your sport is endurance-based that you need to focus on high-rep work. Why don't you get strong in the weight room and build your endurance on the mat? I don't see the point of doing endurance work in the weight room. The time and energy you spend busting out a 12rm set of squats could be better spent on the mat, where you can train endurance and skills at the same time. Since you are already getting endurance work from the sport that you are training for in the first place, your high-rep work should be replaced with max strength work.

Strength training is indeed an important part, but as mentioned before it has its time and place, so does high reps.

You can't really build technique and endurance well at the same time, because technique requires a lot of repetitions of "correct" technique, if you can do skill while completely tired, then why train on technique? Also sparring at full capacity its bound to get you injury and the level of volume cannot be controlled, you can have a very hard sparring or you can simple slack off. Full sparring is normally only done near competition.

In my BJJ experience, training like a bber is crap. I was able to do more pushups, and maintain my level of strength far more than any of the dudes who did cardio or other shit. Sometimes I would 2-4 hours of BJJ class, about 3 which included drilling, rolling, and general moving on nothing but powerlifting. I'm not strong by pl standards, but I am by fighting standards, and at 19 I can submit the other 200lb-220lb 30 year old blues and always survive and outpace with the purples. I've had to back down from rolling hard so much I've turned into a soft roller. As for the blackbelts, they killed me whether it was the 150lb skinny fast guy or the 220lbs big guy.

Again, at your level of competition its different and BJJ favors more raw strength over cardio when it comes to conditioning, because you are not being pushed over your AnT most of the rolls like for example Judo and Wrestling, which have closer to 2:1 to 3:1 ratio.

I can do very well in newaza (groundwork basically sme as BJJ) against both competitive Judo and BJJ blackbelts, and i can pace myself and not get tired.

When i try to roll against a competitive Judo BB im literally "Carwin'd" by the second minute just by trying to survive (judo forces you to attack constantly and virtually everything that can be done to stall is a penalty).

Reason is simple, i have great strength that doesn't fails me when im doing BJJ or Newaza because i can pace myself, but when i can't all my strength is worth crap when they drain all the oxygen of my system.

As you guessed i have done mostly PL routines my whole life, doing now a mixture of low reps and high reps have given me strength and endurance gains.

If sarcoplasm helps energy transportation and such, why wouldn't bodybuilders (who have lots of sarcoplasm) have better endurance than powerlifters? Note: this is a QUESTION, not a STATEMENT. I don't know these things, and a lot of guys on here are clever and knowledgeable so i'm ASKING. (this seems to need clarification more often than not in these parts).

Because they still depend on the aerobic system to carry the oxygen, they will have better endurance, yes but without a good aerobic base they will still tire, however bodybuilder routines, or lets change it to bodybuilding rep range and rest times also build aerobic base due to the fact that HR is kept over 60-70% the whole sessions and you are pushing to 100% HR on the hardest lifts.
 
The only problem I see with BB training is that isolation exercises doesn't involve the concerted movement of many muscle groups, which would be useful in a sports-related setting which requires coordinated and efficient movements. So I suppose high-rep compounds would be more useful than curlz and chest flys still.

Exactly, that's why i said in my first post that the reason bodybuilders suck its because they do a lot of isolation work, but that there are many who do compound works, like Ronnie Coleman.


Bodybuilding is the sport of building large, symmetrical muscles, achieving an especially low body fat %, and then posing on stage to be judged against others who have done the same. While training for this, any increased strength or endurance they achieve is merely a side effect. In other words, bodybuilders goals are purely aesthetic, and if you have goals relating to increased strength, endurance, or any other physical ability, you should train specifically for those instead.

And PL is the sport of reaching top 1RM in a very specific exercise and while they do have some traits that carry over to other sports, the only goal is lifting more weight in either of those 3 lifts.

And if you have any specific goal of strength, endurance and other physical activity you should train specifically for those.

See?

No, it will not elicit more strength gains than lower rep training, and any increased endurance would be a side effect and not the goal of BB training. So why not train specifically for strength and endurance?

Reading comprehension fail.

I never said more strength gains when compared to low reps. And again same could be said of powerlifting. I could go for sport specific strength.

But that's not the issue, training 12 reps has its merit, just like training 5 reps, independently of the goal of BB being aesthetics and the goal of PL being 1 RM on a specific free weight exercise.

No, you're trying to jump from the idea that some sarcoplasmic hypertrophy is beneficial, to that bodybuilder training is more beneficial for an athlete who's sport as an element of endurance, which is an absurd conclusion.

More beneficial when compared to PL or Oly Weightlifter routine, yes.

Sure a lot of exercises are completely useless, but the rep range and the rest times are overall much more beneficial and must be included, strength training also should be included, just like some BBs still include low reps.

You never were doing the Bulgarian system. For that matter, following such a system, or smolov, and then complaining your endurance is no good is stupid. If you're not doing conditioning work, of course your endurance is going to suck, it's not the fault of the strength training, and trying to address it as such is retarded.

Im merely addressing the people who claim that lifting more than 5 reps its only doing it for looks.

Another issue is the carryover, i don't really feel myself better at doing judo, when i lifted 1.3x my BW and when i lifted 2x my BW, there is a limit to how much strength you really need in those sports.

Doing a complex for conditioning work is a far cry from bodybuilding, and drawing a connection between the two is stupid. For that matter, you don't have a clue about how powerlifters do train.

The original topic was addressing sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, i haver never trained a BB routine im merely addressing their rep range and their rest times.

For that matter, it is recognized here that generally skill > endurance > strength, but no one here is stupid enough to confuse bodybuilding with conditioning.

Obviously some do when they claim that Sarcoplasmic = BB.

Again i have never done a BB routine, i find isolation work terribly boring.

If you play these sports you cannot merely get enough efficiency at them by doing them because the resistance will not be scalable and the risk of injury is very very high.

Good someone else addressed this.

Try doing Judo as hard as you do a 12 rep squat and then do it 5 times in a row, not only will you train the shittiest level of technique, but the risk of injury is increased.
 
You can't really build technique and endurance well at the same time, because technique requires a lot of repetitions of "correct" technique, if you can do skill while completely tired, then why train on technique?

I disagree.

Also sparring at full capacity its bound to get you injury and the level of volume cannot be controlled, you can have a very hard sparring or you can simple slack off. Full sparring is normally only done near competition.

In my opinion it doesn't have to be scalable or perfectly volume-controlled. You can have lighter practices where you focus more on technique and harder practices where you focus on conditioning, but the conditioning would mostly be done with drills directly applicable to the sport, e.g. continuous takedown drills for wrestling or flurries of strikes on the heavy bag at full intensity. Then you have one or two days a week of maximal strength training. I think this strategy would work quite well for most anybody except elite fighters.
 
What is this argument about? Which method of muscular strength and endurance training is superior? Generally High Rep workouts VS Low Rep workouts?

Think back to when 150 pound bench was your 1rm. Now that your 1rm is much higher look at how many you can do? Probably 10-20 depending on what your 1rm is now.

So what do you get with low rep high weight workouts? You benefit from being able to move more weight and increased muscular endurance.

What do you get with low weight high rep workouts? Increased muscular endurance and slower weight progression.

Speaking from a BJJ, Boxing and MT background; any muscular endurance that was needed to perform said activities was increased by actively participating in said activities *gasp* The level of muscular adaptation the body goes through when rolling or punching constantly is mind boggling fast when compared to strength increases. For that reason alone I would rather spend time being able to lift more weight then lifting for endurance.



So what is the general consensus on Sarcoplasmic Hypertrophy? Ive always considered it something you want to limit. Regardless of what kind of training you do it will always happen but isnt it detrimental to both cardio and makes you a prime target of chokes.(more shoulder/trap pushed up into your neck means I have a easier time choking you out).

I cannot see a benefit to training in a bodybuilding style that will overcome the loss of maximal strength that one gets in a power lifting manner.
 
What is this argument about? Which method of muscular strength and endurance training is superior? Generally High Rep workouts VS Low Rep workouts?

More like the benefits of sarcoplasmic hypetrophy as part of a training routine.

Think back to when 150 pound bench was your 1rm. Now that your 1rm is much higher look at how many you can do? Probably 10-20 depending on what your 1rm is now.

Yes, but doing high reps also make it more efficient to increase strength through sarcomere hypertrophy, there is a point where there is just "too many" contractile fibers that the current energy systems can't cope and thus you plateau, specially when you have reached top levels of neural adaptation.

By doing 12,8,5,5,8,12 with an average of 2 mins rest, i have managed to add 10kg to my bench which had been stalled for a lot under 5x5, i can also lower my rest times to mere 2 minutes, before i had to take 5 or more to be able to do sets of 5.

You are under the impression that doing 8-12 won't increase contractile fibers, which is wrong, the weight its still heavy to elicit growth, specially when done under conditions of fatigue where less fibers are being recruited, and when it comes to neural adaptation you don't really need a lot of volume.

So what do you get with low rep high weight workouts? You benefit from being able to move more weight and increased muscular endurance.

This is completely false when it comes to sports like judo or wrestling, BJJ allows a lot of time to rest, the beforehand mentioned sports don't, once your arms get tired, its over, they won't recover until the match its over, in BJJ the periods of exertion are about 1:3 compared to the periods of rest, in Judo and Wrestling the intervals are like 3:1, basically hell.

What do you get with low weight high rep workouts? Increased muscular endurance and slower weight progression.

If you add a few low reps sets, you can still gain strength just fine.

Speaking from a BJJ, Boxing and MT background; any muscular endurance that was needed to perform said activities was increased by actively participating in said activities *gasp* The level of muscular adaptation the body goes through when rolling or punching constantly is mind boggling fast when compared to strength increases. For that reason alone I would rather spend time being able to lift more weight then lifting for endurance.

Technical work its still technical work, you can't really go 100% under such training regime of you are risking the most important part to lose.

You can't really use, tactical and technique work as conditioning because you won't be able to develop it properly, you develop the technique and the tactics under a controllable enviroment so that its able to be performed under heavy stress.

<i>So what is the general consensus on Sarcoplasmic Hypertrophy? Ive always considered it something you want to limit. Regardless of what kind of training you do it will always happen but isnt it detrimental to both cardio and makes you a prime target of chokes.(more shoulder/trap pushed up into your neck means I have a easier time choking you out). </i>

Its the base of sarcomere hypertrophy, without sarcoplasmic hypertrophy your strengths gains will also be limited.

I cannot see a benefit to training in a bodybuilding style that will overcome the loss of maximal strength that one gets in a power lifting manner.

I do, it limits training time, it really has no application in a continuous match and strength gains, past certain point, doesn't really translates well into combat.

When i lifted 150kgs in squat i could do 130x5 easy that was my 80%, nowadays i lift 200kg and i had trouble with doing 150x5 less than my 80%, i have been slowly building up a good base and i can see myself improving quickly without losing strength, i realized that i was simply getting too tired and that i needed much more time to recover.

Building up a base where you need less time to recover and can do more sets its integral for strength training too, if you overrely in long resting times as a way to circumvent, it will eventually catch you off, where you really can show your mates that you are a gorilla, but pretty much nothing else.
 
Very interesting. If I understand everything(and everything being factual) that to get maximal results a combination of the two is needed. The two being a mix of high rep work in combination of low rep work. It's about balancing max training and what ill call "Sarcoplasmic Hypertrophy" training to achieve constant progression in muscular endurance and strength.

I believe that is what most posters on this board promote. I think Sarcoplasmic Hypertrophy just sends off warning bells and puts people on the defensive due to the abundant of poor weightlifting advice that surrounds bodybuilding.

I think in the end one has to just find what works best for them which is unfortunate because a strict "Do this and you will achieve greatness" is so much easier and requires no thought.

I still feel that in the end ones main goal in the gym should be to lift more and more weight as apposed to lifting for any other reason. Long term weight progression takes a hell of a lot longer then gaining muscular endurance, at least from my experience.
 
Last edited:
This seems to have turned into an argument about "what will supplement my sport". I think everything you do, training-wise, will supplement your sport if you do it well.

I myself have been inspired by this forum and am moving towards olympic lifts. I think those will do the most for any combat athlete, strength wise - explosivity is hugely important, and i agree with one of the previous posters stating that endurance work can be done on the mat.
 
Even better conditioned than any MAers I know are two powerlifters who also row competively, and one guy who due to an injury does a tonne of prowler work.

How come Pudzanowski, the number 1 powerlifter, couldn't go more then just 1 round vs Sylvia ?

Also what does rowing have to do with powerlifting ? 2 pac was a great rapper but he also trained ballet so my conclusion is that ballet dancers are good rappers.
 
Back
Top