(BEST OF MESO) what not to do for beginners [Hogg]

[Phreezer]

Date: 07/15/02 01:40 PM
Author: Hogg
Subject: For beginners.

I have watched beginners and stagnant novices slug out the same workouts
week after week and they fail to make any progress. My biggest pet peave
is the cable crossover station. I see a lot of guys with no mass
standing in front of the mirror doing all kinds of piss poor variations
of cable crossovers with all of about 10# on each stack. You do realize
that a 2 pulley crossover station is half the resistance right? Look at
the length of cable travel vs. the distance that the weight travels -
simple physics, it is half the load. However, I do not see the same
anemic looking individuals lying on a flat or incline bench with the
chrome girlie weights doing flyes....perhaps it is just ignorance? Just
bear in mind that if the load feels light, common sense should take
over. No, it is not 20#, no, doing a 100# curl with the cable is not the
same as a 100# barbell, etc.

But let us address chest day. Truth be told, you do not need to do 20
sets for chest. Frankly, I would not bother with the pec dec, cable
crossover, or hammer machines. Go and do a pressing movement or two and
then flys or dips and call it done. You want to know the real truth
about building a big chest??? If you are looking for size, you should be
spending a good amount of time on the incline bench with either a
barbell or dumbbells, then, you can either do flat....or.....you can use
the decline bench and work your lowers with dumbbells. Most of you head
to the flat bench. Flat bench is ok but actually, the tudor bompa's IEMG
studies show that decline dumbbell bench is more effective for building
the pectoralis major. It is up to you. I still do flat dumbbells only
because my training partner is stuck on them but frankly, my greatest
lower pec development came from decline dumbbell bench.
Anyway, on to another important topic.

So you wonder why you are not growing? Hmmm, well, I never see you guys
putting in work in the squat rack. Actually, I dont see you doing legs
hardly at all and when you do, you seem to fixate on the 45 degree leg
press with 2-3 plates per side and perhaps the leg extension. Again,
though you have 270# on the sled, you are actually only challenged by
270 * cos(45) = 191# which is not equivalent to a 190# squat....not even
190 on the smith machine. But I give you credit though, at least you are
doing something. Those of you who do not train legs are really limiting
yourselves.

On back day, there is a platform and it has an olympic bar on it. There
are also benches near the dumbbells. You typically meander over to the
hammer strength row machines.....why? Why not pick up a bar and row it
or use the dumbbells and do some rows? The machines are NOT the same.
Any time that you are on a fixed track, you have the opportunity to
cheat the load a bit. When you are bent over with a heavy dumbbell or
barbell in your hands, it is gravity, straight down, you can either lift
it or not. You cant suck your body up to your elbow and then lean back
to move the handle...the bar is a dead piece of meat, you either smash
it in to your chest/belly or you do not. Simple. easy. effective.

The core....a very important piece of the equation. Much as you need a
strong back, you need strong abs and obliques as well. some of you will
be able to do deadlifts...and if you can do the movement, there is no
reason not to. They will give you good trap, forearm, lumbar, and leg
development.....and being use to having a heavy barbell in your hands
will make movements such as shrugs, rows, and power cleans that much
easier. For those of you who cannot do deadlifts, you should spend some
time on the back extension bench. Again, machines are nice, easy to sit
in, etc. but there is nothing like dead mass working against gravity and
when your bodyweight is not enough, you hug a plate. Again, simple,
easy, and effective. You do not need to do 10 sets, heck 3 is better
than nothing...just make sure not to neglect this area. Similarly, you
should do a little ab work. Dont spend a half hour working your abs,
just hit them with a few sets and move on. Add resistance if necessary.
Arms....Lord have mercy, talk about an area that you guys are willing to
commit effort to...but there is a difference between wasted effort and
good effort. Again, no need for 10 sets here either. Go grab a barbell,
place your hands a tad wider than shoulder width, and curl the barbell
WITHOUT using your anterior deltoids. You are not there to impress
anyone, pick a weight that you can handle and do some good clean curls.
When you cannot curl the weight clean, you can give it a little swing to
help you up for the last rep or two. By this time though, your arms
should be pumped up and burning so a couple of swings is all it takes.
Maybe 3-4 sets here and then on to another exercise....no, not the cable
curl. Tudor Bompa's IEMG studies show that the preacher curl is most
effective in stimulating the biceps. Personally, I like using a dumbbell
and working one arm at a time. Again, the key here is not hoisting
weight, do the movement properly, dont try to spring off of your biceps
tendon at the bottom. Lower the weight and lift it, when you cant lift
it, do the other arm. I see some guys having someone help them up and
then continue to help them up for another 4 reps and they do this for 5
sets...you cant recover from it....Geez! when you cant curl the bar
anymore by yourself, that is FAILURE. That is bad enough, set the bar
down. Honestly, 3 sets of straight bar and 3 sets of preachers is more
than adequate for most beginners. 4-5 sets of straight bar curls by
themselves is enough. Some of you guys do double this and wonder why
your arms will not grow. Simple, you are overtraining.

Triceps, this is an area where I see a lot of people slack
EXCEPT....except for the pulley pushdown. Now, mind you, the pulley
pushdown is effective and I wont knock it but, I think some french
presses, skull crushers, or triceps dips are required as well. Again
though, you dont need 10 sets for triceps. You should be able to do
enough damage in 6-8 sets or say 4-5 good sets of skull crushers.
See, really what I am saying is, there are about a dozen basic exercises
and many of you totally sidestep the basics. You use a mix of machines,
cables, unorthodox movements, you do too much of it, and you never grow,
and you wonder why. Frankly, if you fixate moreso on a high school
weight training program, your results will be much better than trying to
use something that you read in muscle and fitness.

And for heaven's sake, if you have Arnold's 'Encyclopedia of Modern
Bodybuilding', burn it....the book is heresy....and you will never
recover from his routines, not even the beginner routines. It is
pointless to go to the gym day after day and beat yourself in to
submission only to find that you are stagnant. Work hard but work smart
and do not allow your zeal and enthusiasm to drag you into an
overtrained state.

I did not write this to be critical nor did I cover all of the topics
for a whole body program. My intent was merely to call attention to some
problems that I see time and time again with the younger crowd, and
perhaps the middle aged beginning weight trainer as well.

[Phreezer]

Date: 07/15/02 03:05 PM
Author: deadguy
Subject: RE: For beginners.

Hogg, you forgot to mention a few in the crowd who have been lifting
for years and consider themselves an expert in the art of
bodybuidling. When, in fact, their form on many or all exercises is
horrid. Good form applies to all, and I, too, get pissed when I see
these people telling the beginners how to do things in the gym. I am
no expert in any bodybuilding field, but I DO know good form vs. bad
form on all exercises. My steady and symetrical growth reflects my use
of strict form. I hope people take notice and realize they aren't
growing like I am because they refuse to trade in their ego for proper
form and maximum growth. I don't know of any guys that got the
prettiest gym-rat because he had 10 plates on a squat rack (you know
that guy...the one that only does 1/4 squats) Great post, bro. I hope
people actually read it.
...the last to let you down.

[Phreezer]

Date: 07/15/02 03:15 PM
Author: Grizzly
Subject: RE: For beginners.

I wholeheartedly agree with you Hogg. The only thing I disagree with
slightly is the hammer strength thing. Truth be told, I am the world's
biggest machine hater. However, I actually like the hammer strength
machines, for chest anyway. Now, I'm not saying to do them instead of
"real" weights, but I think that, when used in CONJUNCTION with
incline BB or DB presses, they are quite effective. Overall, though,
you are very correct and give a great layout of what to do and what
not to do.
Another piece of advices for the beginner. DO NOT NEGLECT NUTRITION.
You can beat the shit out of your body, but without the nutrients
necessary to grow you simply won't. Period. So, eat, eat, eat, eat and
then eat some more. Are you full yet? Good, eat again. Gonna puke yet?
Good, now force down some more food. Maybe it's just my bowels, but I
know that if I'm not shitting all day long, then I'm plain not eating
enough.
Lifestyle- Here's another big sabateur of progress. Let me guess, you
go to the gym and then head right to the old bar. Wrong way, people.
Now, I'm not going to say not to drink, because Lord knows I do enough
of it myself. However, limit yourself to once or twice per week and
don't go overboard more than once every couple of months. Technically,
you shouldn't ever get plastered, but let's be real here. Also, learn
to sleep. You're not going to miss anything except those really cool
Real Sex shows on HBO. The late night programming everywhere else
sucks, so why not sleep. Besides, if you go to bed early and start to
grow and get dead sexy, you can start making your own real sex shows.
I probably left some shit out, but, really, growing muscle is the
easiest thing in the world. Consistency, intesity, nutrition and time
is all that it takes. See how easy it is?
One more word to the beginners. You know all the really huge dudes in
the gym? You're not going to get close. Right away that is. Those guys
have all been doing it for damn near or more than a decade. Be happy
with 30lbs your first year and an ever decreasing amount there after.
So, 30lbs year one, 15lbs year 2, 10lbs year 3, 5lbs year 4 and so on.
Look at that, in ten years you're now 70-80lbs larger. Maybe more,
maybe less depending upon the starting point. Moral of the story: It
takes a lot of time and dedication to be huge and lean, so don't get
discouraged that you're not Ronnie Coleman in 4 months. Note: that ol'
boy has been at it for like 18years or more.

[Phreezer]

Date: 07/16/02 05:30 PM
Author: dumbbellpress
Subject: RE: RE: Hogg

Hogg, just thought I would add something....
My first year and a half of training, I did about 25 sets per major
muscle group and 15 sets for minor muscle groups. My workouts lasted
3 hours. The only reason I grew the first 6 months or so was because
I was a beginner - even if your nutrition is crap, you get one hour
of sleep per night, you train with terrible form and what not, a
beginner will always grow. But after about 6 months even beginners
hit that plateau and stop growing. So the first 6 moths I grew. The
next 12 months I did not grow at all, even though I was killing
myself 3 hours per day, 6 days per week.
Then I made the smartest decision in my life. I bought Dorian Yates'
book Blood and Guts. To me Dorian is a God. My workouts switched
from 3 hours to 60 minutes for two bodyparts. My strength went
through the roof. My size went through the roof. I took his routine
- 5 to 6 sets for major muscle groups and 4 sets for arms and
modified it into my present routine - 12 sets for major muscle
groups and 6 sets for arms. I am as big and strong as I have ever
been, thanks to taking EVERY SINGLE SET TO TOTAL, 100% MUSCULAR
FAILURE, and only doing 112 sets for majors and 6 sets for arms.
dumbbellpress - Future Husband of Jennifer Love Hewitt
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=91253)









Date: 07/16/02 06:06 PM
Edited: 07/16/02 06:20 PM
Author: Hogg
Subject: RE: RE: Hogg

Well, truth be told, though this sounds weird, I made my greatest
gains in training poundage strength - not limit strength - by
doing 3 sets of an exercise and the last set was balls out to
failure. I did 3 exercises, 3 sets, last set to failure, gave each
bodypart a week, and I was able to put more weight on the bar or
grab more reps each week. However, I did not grow as much as when
I attempted to train bodyparts roughly 2x per week. Now mind you,
I did not develop the strength but I noticed gains constantly. I
am referring to my periods of natural training between 1999 and
2001.
My current program is evolving and I am beginning to incorporate
failure and near failure training (edit - again)after having read
Zatsiorsky's "The Science and Practice of Strength Training". In
terms of gaining strength endurance, training to failure is more
effective than the submaximal method. In terms of hypertrophy, the
submaximal method taken "near" failure (a relative term) is just
as effective in producing sarcoplasmic changes in muscle fibers
and is thus equally as effective as training to failure. Now mind
you, we are talking about bodybuilding training with volume, not
strength training and it appears that even one of the most
reknowned trainers of eastern bloc athletes finds a suitable
purpose for training to failure (actually, zatsiorsky refers to it
as the repeated effort method). Zatsiorsky states that training to
failure is necessary to ensure maximum recruitment of slow-firing
MU's and if all MU's are not called upon, then the training result
is less than optimum yield. Now, the argument is that training
"near" failure ensures a high enough percentage of MU's stimulated
to thus bring about a similar change in the muscle as repeated
effort. Mind you, "near" may very well constitute being within one
rep of failure. Training poundages are in the 10-12 rep range or
80% 1RM or less. I believe there is also a mention of 7-9 reps in
the text but I cannot cite the author nor the context in which
this rep range is discussed (if at all). (edit - because I do not
have the text here with me at the office)
What was my point? Ummm, I guess my point was that yes, you are
right, lower volume and training to failure will produce good
bodybuilding results in some individuals. Others can make gains
training with higher volume and lower intensity, and yet others
can make gains with lower volume, lower intensity, greater
frequency. But bodybuilding is much different than power training.
I dont really see the purpose of doing doubles and triples as a
bodybuilder. I could see a heavy 5 rep phase for thickness and
power development but bodybuilders do not need to do the
superheavy near max efforts that strength athletes use. (edit, I
see that I failed to make an argument as to the different training
methodologies, I guess I might have been saying that all methods
will work to an extent and that mixing up the intensity, volume,
frequency is important and that all are related in terms of
training effect)
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=91269)

[Phreezer]

Date: 07/16/02 06:27 PM
Author: jook (no profile)
Subject: RE: RE: Hogg

thanks for the post hogg, i've been lifting on and off for
5years. the first 2years i lifted everyday. then i took a couple
of years off. now i've been lifting for a little over a year
now. i've made some good gains recently, probably better than
when i was lifting a few years b4. my chest has always had
trouble growing. probably b/c i was overtraining. my question
is, i do 4 sets of incline on straight bar, 4 sets of
straightbar flat, and then i repeat this with dumbells, and then
i finish them up with 4 sets of flies. is this too much? also i
never do decline, and noticed i don't have much of a lower
chest. the reason i never do them, is b/c a couple of ppl have
told me decline doesn't do anything except boost your ego. what
do you think?
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=91280)









Date: 07/16/02 06:48 PM
Author: Hogg
Subject: RE: RE: Hogg

In my opinion, that is way too much work....that is 20 sets. I
personally like an incline pressing movement and prefer the
bar. If left to my own choosing, I would then do a shallow
decline with dumbbells, please note the terms "shallow" and
"with dumbbells". You can turn this into an ego booster with a
high decline and a bar because the range of motion is nothing.
With a shallow decline, your lats will not come in to
play...and the purpose of decline is to take your anterior
delts out of your chest training. You lower the dumbbells into
your arm pits and push up from there. The pec is
well-stretched and bears the majority of the load. Your
triceps only come in to play at the top. I would then follow
this with a flying movement, perhaps flat, perhaps a shallow
incline. I would do no more than 5 sets of each pressing
movement and perhaps 3 sets of flys with decent weight. That
was my best chest routine ever.
The lowers are what gives you that squared off
appearance....your pecs should hang like slabs of beef, not
like little moon shaped tits, and when you lift your arms,
your pecs should still be there....that is what the incline is
for. Doing the flys properly is important, there should be no
pressing involved....the range of motion will only be the
lower 2/3 of the arc from the finished position to the extreme
stretch...which means that you dont need to bother clanging
the dumbbells together at the top. You should be rolling your
shoulder blades toward each other at the very bottom to
stretch and them spreading them out at the top when you
contract. It is hard to explain ....you want to stick your
chest out and stretch it at the bottom and then use your chest
to pull the weight back up. Your arms should be kinda locked
and you should not be using your biceps to complete the
movement, only to hold your arms bent.
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=91292)









Date: 07/16/02 10:36 PM
Edited: 07/16/02 10:44 PM
Author: jook (no profile)
Subject: RE: RE: Hogg

got it. okay a couple of last questions. lol. sorry. so are
you saying do 4-5 of one excersise for each part of the
chest, and then finishing the up with flies. thanks bro
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=91393)









Date: 07/16/02 10:48 PM
Author: Hogg
Subject: RE: RE: Hogg

4-5 sets of two pressing movements followed by a few sets
of flies.

[Phreezer]

Date: 07/18/02 01:18 PM
Author: mark (no profile)
Subject: RE: RE: Hogg

hogg, you FINISH with flies? I'm wondering if anyone
else prefers to start with them for pre-exaustion of the
chest, or if you have any opinions on how much worth is
in this. Thanks alot
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=92248)









Date: 07/18/02 01:43 PM
Author: The anonymous guy from above.
Subject: RE: RE: Hogg

if pre-exhausting, then yes, you would do them then.
If you are using a pressing movement with the
intentions of forcing maximum MU recruitment and
protein degradation through the pressing movement,
then you would use a suitable load, not a reduced load
via pre-exhaustion. Make sense? If your business is to
stress your pectoralis with a pressing movement, then
you load the pressing movement. If you are
pre-exhausting the pecs and trying to bring about
total saturation such that the anterior deltoids and
triceps are called to pick up the slack after the pecs
fail, then you go that route. Not everyone uses
pre-exhaustion and those who do might not use it on
every single movement. Frankly, I would never do leg
extensions before squatting....I'd rather squat some
weight and get my thing on with the movement. However,
I have used pre-exhaustion on flat bench with
dumbbells because, since my pec tear, I cant put the
heavy loads on my newly-formed pec tendon.
Pre-exhaustion has its place but I dont consider it a
staple part of daily training.
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=92266)









Date: 07/17/02 12:02 PM
Author: Hogg
Subject: RE: RE: Hogg

Just wanted to comment that the recommended rep interval in the
repeated and submaximal effort methods was 5 to 7 and 10 to 12.
Also, I wanted to clarify something, when I spoke of MU
recruitment, we were discussing the process of developing
strength. Hypertrophy was the result of protein degradation in
the muscle.
Though this book that I have mentioned can be rather dry at
times, it is very informative...much like all of the other books
on the johnsmith reading list.
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=91637)









Date: 07/17/02 10:13 PM
Author: Archangel (no profile)
Subject: RE: RE: Hogg

Hogg, I don't suppose you can list some excellent books from
the John Smith Library of Training for us uneducated folks.
Thanks.
AA
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=91952)









Date: 07/18/02 12:31 AM
Author: Hogg
Subject: johnsmith's recommended list

Sure....that is an easy request to fill
1. Physiology - Brooks and Fahey
2.Periodisation by Tudor Bompa
3.The Science and Practice of Strength Training - Zatsiorsky

4.Super Training - Mel Siff and Verkoshansky
5. The weightliftring encyclopedia - Arthur Dreschler
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=92007)









Date: 07/18/02 08:53 PM
Edited: 07/18/02 09:07 PM
Author: Archangel (no profile)
Subject: RE: johnsmith's recommended list

Thanks alot Hogg. I'm sure others will benefit from this
list too. And of course thanks to JS.
AA
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=92471)

[Phreezer]

Date: 07/18/02 09:31 PM
Author: WWAD (no email) (no profile)
Subject: RE: RE: johnsmith's recommended list

Hogg... Dude. I liked your post. Lots of good stuff.
With one exception:
You trashed Arnold's book.
Arnold is the God of Bodybuilding. Undisputed champion.
He is the legend. No one will argue that. Yet you say
his advice is crap. What gives?
Now, before you flame my newbie ass, let me say that I,
too, have come to the conclusion that his workouts are
hardcore and that they are impossible without lots of
juice and from that standpoint can be misleading. I do
think, however, that EVERYONE who would read that book
KNOWS Arnold's use of AAS. Arnold can't say it, but we
all know it is true. Nevertheless, the book is a useful
tool in one's training arsenal. Thus to say his book
ought to be burned is just wrong.
I guess I'm just bitching because you flamed my hero.
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=92489)









Date: 07/18/02 09:41 PM
Author: Grizzly
Subject: RE: RE: johnsmith's recommended list

I thought the same thing, but on different grounds. I,
too, think that the training sections are really
pretty shitty, although there are some valid points
made. However, the rest of the book is great. I've
found the section on pre-contest to be quite
informative and pretty handy. I will say, however,
that the part about simply lowering your water intake
to dry out is complete bullshit. Arnold may say that's
what he did, but he's fucking lying. I also thought
the section on how terrible steroids are was just a
little hypocritical.
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=92491)









Date: 07/19/02 01:49 AM
Edited: 07/19/02 01:57 AM
Author: Hogg
Subject: RE: RE: johnsmith's recommended list

Dude, he is my hero too....but his training
methodologies have absolutely NO science behind
them...it was all trial and error....and most people
today will admit that he was a chronic over
trainer....the problem that I have with his book is
that newcomers are misled by his training programs and
spend 2 years in the gym without making much
progress...and then they wonder why...."I'm not
working hard enough!!!" That is not the case.
For motivation, there is nothing that I like better
than flipping those pages....see, I had the hard cover
encyclopedia version 1. I bought it about 15 years ago
but a friend never returned it to me...and so I flip
through the paperback version looking over those old
champions...and even the newer champions that were
contemporary during my first phase of bodybuilding -
Ray, Wheeler, Cormier, etc.
So let me apologize for denouncing the book as heresy.
Yes, the book has its place if you completely
disregard the training methodologies.
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=92556)









Date: 07/19/02 07:15 PM
Author: fred flintstone
Subject: RE: RE: johnsmith's recommended list

yep when i was in High School we only had universal
machine and we would all be at thebench station or
the military press or pulldown machine. we didnt
have any free weights. we would spend all day going
up and down the stack getting all pumped didnt make
any real progress. I would run 4 or so miles a day
it would be 100degrees in summer didnt eat to much
until afternoon. only stsrted again a couple years
ago doin basic heavy bench dead squat row and eatin
went 195-225 1st year got to 235 but havent been
lifting or eatin right but got a freezer full of
halbut and salmon and a month away from deer season
I wish i knew then what i do now
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...ssage_ID=92996)









Date: 03/11/03 08:28 PM
Author: AnimalMass
Subject: RE: RE: johnsmith's recommended list

bump
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...sage_ID=210442)









Date: 03/11/03 08:50 PM
Author: desi baba
Subject: RE: RE: johnsmith's recommended list

I have something to say too guys. I am 19 right
now and i have been lifting since i was 15 YET i
made most of my gains in my last 2 years.WHY?
Because although i was still using free weights
and all that a while ago my biggest problem was
i never ate enough to gain muscular size because
of fear of getting fat again (i use to be
overweight as child and my early teens)at this
point i can honestly say that while free weights
and basic movements are important they are worth
nothing more than a rat's ass if your
nutritional intake is not right.
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...sage_ID=210458)









Date: 03/12/03 04:44 AM
Author: Gavin (no profile)
Subject: RE: RE: johnsmith's recommended list

Nice post....
I was laughing at Johns book list...I gots all
of them ..lol. I have an idea of starting a
lending library in my gym when it opens in May -
anyone think this would work? You guys seem to
want to learn so I presume that many of the
folks i had written off in the past might
actually get their shit together given the
chance...Hmmmmm...Library it is then. Book
recomendations welcomed...
Gavin.
(http://www.mesomorphosis.com/forums/...sage_ID=210663)

[Grizzly]

I remember that post. In fact, I thought about it a few weeks ago. Good pull from the archives, Phreezer.

That post is nearly two years old. Damn, I've spent too much of my life fucking off on Meso. LOL

[J DUB]

Yep, that is a classic from the old training section. Hogg hit everything right on the money. I only wish I was mean enough to hand that to some of the guys at my gym

[Umyea]

Phreezer is GOD..Good shit man ..