# Dummy Up and Lift the Fucking Weight



## basskiller (Feb 12, 2013)

I recently posted a thread about the fact that just because you are NOT sore, that does not mean you are recovered. One of the responses I received contained this:

The best way to find out rest is Your body and knowing what kind of Muscle Fiber you are building. type I, all day and even a second Sunday. Type IIa, 7 to 10 days, Type IIB, 4 to 6 days, Type IIC, 4 to 6 days...

IA) Hmmm…….The guy then kind of missed the point and went on about being sore was surely an indication you were not recovered and so forth. It seemed he was certain that all heavy training would produce DOMS, which just isn’t the case. My counter post was:

IA) That is NOT the point that was being made by this post. We are agreeing in principle, while someone is missing the point. The point that was made was JUST BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT SORE DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU ARE RECOVERED AND READY TO TRAIN AGAIN. Last Friday I deadlifted 590, did bent rows with 310 for 3 sets, did glute/ham raises for 3 sets, and did weighted situps with a 190 lb dumbell on my chest. Guess what? Not a BIT of soreness. I rarely get sore. I train a LOT of people and some guys get sore almost looking at weights, and others never, or extremely rarely and only when making radical changes. Just because you are not sore doesn't mean you are ready to go again. Some guys can train productively each bodypart 2-3 times a week, others need 7-9 days. When you can add weight to the bar between session, you are likely in the zone.

There is no way in hell to know what fiber type/subtype you are hitting with certainty. You can use rep ranges as a good guess, but that is about all you are doing. You can certainly say I am attempting to target fast-twitch,or slow twitch, but if you think you can say today todays WO is IIB, and Thursday's is IIC, I will ask how the hell you know.

And nobody better tell all the guys that hit bodyparts twice a week and make great progress that a minimum of 4 days is needed. Many, many good and great bodybuilders train twice a week. Arnold often did three times a week, Westside Barbell uses 72 hours between DE and ME day and that system works beyond belief, Granted many overtrain on it, but lots do not. And I am not disagreeing with you totally here as I think the AVERAGE trainee does best with 5-7 days between bodyparts/lifts. But many also do well with less.

His response was:

There are several ways to see what kind of fiber you naturally have, but even then you can train them differently and change the fiber type to what you need from it.

IA) OK, NOW WE ARE MAKING A HUGE LEAP OF FAITH. I know what the guy is talking about. There are some studies that show that it is POSSIBLE for SOME people (most of the studies have been on animals) under LONG DURATION loading to possibly have SOME fibers switch to a different type/subtype. Soooooo, my response was:

IA) Short of a biopsy you ARE GUESSING about fiber type. People have extreme variations in fiber type not only from person to person, but muscle to muscle. I have read the studies that point to SOME fiber type change-over and the amount is usually quite limited and very much determined by LONG-TERM loading and more importantly genetic predisposition. It's not like you can devote six weeks to a loading protocol and say "voila" I now have X% more type IIB. Not in the real world. It is only a WILD speculative guess.

IA) WAY better to direct your loading at what type of gains you are hoping to achieve than any hopes of KNOWING the EXACT fiber type you are hitting and potentially hoping to manipulate.

IA) So another board member puts up a post about hyperplasia. That is when the body, instead of hypertrophying the existing muscle cells, actually creates new ones. Now, the studies about this are pretty damn vague and inexact about, not only IF it can be done people under normal conditions, but what those conditions are, and to what extent. So, my response:

IA) HYPERPLASIA and fiber type change are two different issues, and the author of the hyperplasia article admits that the evidence is far from conclusive. Do I believe it can occur? Absolutely. To what degree, and under what stimulus, and MOST IMPORTANTLY for who? These are all big questions that for most people will always remain totally unanswered. I read a LOT of studies. It's part of my job as a full-time trainer, but for most people spending endless hours trying to determine if they can only hypertrophy, or possibly hyperplasia their muscles is just endless mental masturbation. What really matters is if the trainee is getting bigger and stronger on a consistent basis. One of the mods on my board is an elite caliber powelifter that squats in the 800's and benches almost 600. He is often posed questions like this and his answer to most of these guys is just dummy up and lift the fucking weight. This is often the best advice possible for those guys that constantly overanalyise everything about weight training. Are you getting stronger every week or not. If not, you have much more to worry about than shit like this--lol.

And by the way, I’m not capping on the guy. He seems very intelligent, and has, I believe the best of intentions, but at some point, all the esoteric knowledge becomes so less than useful.

So many of you out there spend countless hours worrying about things like that, but STILL don’t know how to be progressive in the gym. Many read everything they can including those types of studies and change their routines every time they read the next article or study. Sometime the best advice is much like EXMGQ’s/PullinBig, Just dummy-up and lift the fucking weight.

Iron Addict


----------



## chicken_hawk (Feb 12, 2013)

How true. I tend to see guys do all sorts of advanced training techniques when they should stick with the basics. They often act like getting big is some sort of secret.

Hawk


----------



## squatster (Nov 28, 2015)

Dumb up
Love it
Like your articles man


----------



## 101st Ranger (Dec 16, 2015)

Great write up Pride!!!

...and lol at the mental masterbation reference.


----------

