# Strength training vs Hypertrophy training



## Vieope (May 31, 2004)

_I usually see this question of what type of training you do. I can´t understand how one can be different from the other.
In order to increase strength you must increase muscles.
In order to increase muscles  you must increase strength. 
They are related, it can´t be separated. 

Don´t you agree that it is the same thing? _


----------



## Mudge (May 31, 2004)

Vieope said:
			
		

> _I usually see this question of what type of training you do. In order to increase strength you must increase muscles. _



I dont agree really, I'm about as strong as a 137 pound national level powerlifter. I can maintain size and gain some strength, if I restricted my calories I am sure I could continue to lose weight and maintain strength to some degree.

Some genetics, and some tricks thrown in there.

I would say there can be some kind of relationship in general but there is no direct line.


----------



## Vieope (May 31, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I dont agree really, I'm about as strong as a 137 pound national level powerlifter.


_The problem is that you are comparing with another person, try to compare between the different stages of your muscle development. You have more muscles now than before so you are stronger. If you lose muscles/if you gain muscles/strength up/strength down.
Muscles are the only "fuel" to lift heavier. Damn, I sound so stupid with this argument. 

Still don´t agree ?  What am I missing? _


----------



## Mudge (May 31, 2004)

I dont agree. Do you really think a 137 pound person was born benching 385 pounds? I would venture not.

I am not lifting much more than I was with 3/4" smaller arms, biceps are the same lifts, triceps a little stronger but not much.

I do not believe size and strength share a direct correlation. I do believe you can create a stronger muscle and maintain bodyweight and size.


----------



## CowPimp (Jun 1, 2004)

If you gain strength you will gain size.  If you gain size you will gain strength.  However, the correlation is not linear.  You can gain a lot of strength and a little size, a little size and a lot of strength, or somewhere in between.  There is a reason powerlifters and bodybuilders have completely different training regimens.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 1, 2004)

_What is the science behind it? Strength training produce a more compact muscle fiber? _


----------



## Saturday Fever (Jun 1, 2004)

> In order to increase strength you must increase muscles.
> In order to increase muscles you must increase strength.
> They are related, it can´t be separated.



Wrong. I went from 241lb in late April 2003 to 207lb TODAY. In that same timeframe I took a sanctioned squat of 495 and made it 540. I took a sanctioned deadlift of 505 and made it 600. So the first line about needing to increase muscle to increase strength isn't right. Because I've never been fat. My losses all came from the muscle department.

To increase muscle is a fairly simple, yet intensely complex, thing. You need to lift an adequate amount of tension for an adequate amount of time. So, for example, you do a set of 8 and it takes you 20 seconds. Then you do a set of 2 that takes you 20 seconds. The time is the same, but in the second set the tension was 150lb heavier. Which do you think is going to be more beneficial? From a hypertrophy standpoint, neither is better. From a strength standpoint, the second set is better.

So you do not have to add strength to add size, but it is an option. But I argue that they're not related and they can be separated.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 1, 2004)

_In your example, you said that you lost weight(muscles) and yet you were able to increase the weight in your exercises. You agree with me that your body changed in something to be able to lift heavier. Agreed? So, what was it that changed that was not muscles? See where I am confused? _


----------



## Saturday Fever (Jun 1, 2004)

I don't understand your question. 

 I think you're asking why I was able to lose weight and muscle but still increase my lifts. The answer is in the way I train. If I didn't answer your question, maybe you can reword it.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 1, 2004)

_Your body went through a change, therefore it can lift heavier.
What changed in your body to make you lift heavier? _


----------



## Saturday Fever (Jun 1, 2004)

Oh hell, I don't know. I just trained. But then, in strength training, that's all you have to do. Train right.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 1, 2004)

Last I recall science still says you can change to some degree the balance of fiber types in your muscles (meaning favoritism). If you look at a crock or gator they are nearly all fast twitch fibers, lots of strength and speed but no endurance. So by your training you can stay lightweight and remain quite strong, or remain somewhat weak and yet be quite large in relation to the former.

You can become stronger without eating more (becoming bigger).


----------



## Saturday Fever (Jun 1, 2004)

Size is more about diet than routine, anyways.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 1, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Oh hell, I don't know. I just trained. But then, in strength training, that's all you have to do. Train right.


_Good to hear someone say "I don´t know" here. The last threads that I watched people discussing, ego was more important.  _



			
				Mudge said:
			
		

> Last I recall science still says you can change to some degree the balance of fiber types in your muscles (meaning favoritism). If you look at a crock or gator they are nearly all fast twitch fibers, lots of strength and speed but no endurance. So by your training you can stay lightweight and remain quite strong, or remain somewhat weak and yet be quite large in relation to the former.
> 
> You can become stronger without eating more (becoming bigger).



_Yeah, I am convinced by this fast twich fibers explanation. So, since I am in to hypertrophy, the old saying that 8-12 rep still is the best method out there to stimulate the other fibers that I forgot the name? _


----------



## Vieope (Jun 1, 2004)

Vieope said:
			
		

> _ So, since I am in to hypertrophy, the old saying that 8-12 rep still is the best method out there to stimulate the other fibers that I forgot the name? _


_Everybody is different, trial an error, it takes time and experimentation to see what works for you. You should know that by now. _


----------



## Saturday Fever (Jun 1, 2004)

What the hell? While everyone may be different, science doesn't lie.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 1, 2004)

_What is the last words of science regarding hypertrophy? _


----------



## Saturday Fever (Jun 1, 2004)

That hypertrophy is attained by providing an adequate amount of tension for an adequate amount of time. I think I covered this above.


----------



## SquatBenchDead (Jun 1, 2004)

It is the link between your CNS and your muscle fibers.  At first, you may only be using 50% of the available muscle fibers to complete a particular lift.  As you go on in your training, you will keep increasing your neural-musculer efficiency.  So eventually, if you are training properly, will increase your efficiency to somewhere in the range of 85-95%.  At this point you will need to increase the cross section of the muscle fiber to increase the weight performed in any given lift.  Now don't assume all at once that you are included in that 85-95%.  Chances are you are not even close.  Most people don't train properly for strength, even the ones who think they are training for strength


----------



## Mudge (Jun 1, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Size is more about diet than routine, anyways.


I think that is what it mainly boils down to, PLs stay in a weight class by simply not eating more.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 1, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Size is more about diet than routine, anyways.


_That can´t be right, specially now that I believe some types of training develop each type of fiber. Unless you are talking about fat. _


----------



## LAM (Jun 1, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> Wrong. I went from 241lb in late April 2003 to 207lb TODAY. In that same timeframe I took a sanctioned squat of 495 and made it 540. I took a sanctioned deadlift of 505 and made it 600. So the first line about needing to increase muscle to increase strength isn't right. Because I've never been fat. My losses all came from the muscle department.
> 
> To increase muscle is a fairly simple, yet intensely complex, thing. You need to lift an adequate amount of tension for an adequate amount of time. So, for example, you do a set of 8 and it takes you 20 seconds. Then you do a set of 2 that takes you 20 seconds. The time is the same, but in the second set the tension was 150lb heavier. Which do you think is going to be more beneficial? From a hypertrophy standpoint, neither is better. From a strength standpoint, the second set is better.
> 
> So you do not have to add strength to add size, but it is an option. But I argue that they're not related and they can be separated.


what's the deal with your bench ?


----------



## Mudge (Jun 1, 2004)

Here is one to ponder. When you lift, the human body does not utilize all of your muscle fibers for that lift. So perhaps powerlifting can be seen in part as training the body to utilize more of the fibers for your lift, enabling a greater lift.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 1, 2004)

SquatBenchDead said:
			
		

> At first, you may only be using 50% of the available muscle fibers to complete a particular lift.


Beaten to the punch.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 1, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> Here is one to ponder. When you lift, the human body does not utilize all of your muscle fibers for that lift. So perhaps powerlifting can be seen in part as training the body to utilize more of the fibers for your lift, enabling a greater lift.


_
Maybe powerlifting training is just there to prepare the CNS for a more difficult workout, not making it crash or to sustain more weight. Not exactly to create more muscles.
So for hypertrophy to happen we need to work out before the failure/crash of CNS ? _


----------



## Mudge (Jun 1, 2004)

Either form of training must not over-tax the CNS. But the only way I believe to try and force the body to utilizing a higher precentage of fibers to do the work (recruitment) is to lift HEAVY weights.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 1, 2004)

_Is there other way to train than heavy? 
Please don´t say that light training do something. _


----------



## Mudge (Jun 1, 2004)

When I mean heavy I mean low reps, for me under 8 reps would generically be "heavyish." I have done as low as 1-3 for bench though  Lots of people rotate rep schemes.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 1, 2004)

_Ok  
I am addicted to 6 reps. _


----------



## SquatBenchDead (Jun 1, 2004)

You need to rotate set and rep schemes and % of 1rm throughout the length of a strength training cycle.  You never perform the same weight for the same exercise 2 workouts in a row.  You always increase the weight.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 1, 2004)

SquatBenchDead said:
			
		

> You always increase the weight.


_Yes but in some muscles I am weak. (shoulder, quads, .. ) I can´t always increase the weight. _


----------



## Saturday Fever (Jun 1, 2004)

LAM said:
			
		

> what's the deal with your bench ?


 1) I have never placed the same amount of focus on my bench as I have my deadlift, and more recently my squat.
 2) I simply don't care about my bench.

 I know that 3 things are true. I increased my deadlift by over 300lb in 17 months. I increased my squat over 400lb in 17 months. If I placed the same emphasis on my bench, I'd be pressing over 400 in no time. But quite simply, I don't care. My bench is not hindering ME at all.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 1, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> 1) I have never placed the same amount of focus on my bench as I have my deadlift, and more recently my squat.
> 2) I simply don't care about my bench.
> 
> I know that 3 things are true. I increased my deadlift by over 300lb in 17 months. I increased my squat over 400lb in 17 months. If I placed the same emphasis on my bench, I'd be pressing over 400 in no time. But quite simply, I don't care. My bench is not hindering ME at all.



_Is there a way to put in a few lines the principles of Westside training? _


----------



## LAM (Jun 1, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> 1) I have never placed the same amount of focus on my bench as I have my deadlift, and more recently my squat.
> 2) I simply don't care about my bench.
> 
> I know that 3 things are true. I increased my deadlift by over 300lb in 17 months. I increased my squat over 400lb in 17 months. If I placed the same emphasis on my bench, I'd be pressing over 400 in no time. But quite simply, I don't care. My bench is not hindering ME at all.


I was just wondering...you could do fairly decent in a PL meet if your brought your BP up to pair with the 2 lifts...


----------



## SquatBenchDead (Jun 2, 2004)

Vieope said:
			
		

> _Yes but in some muscles I am weak. (shoulder, quads, .. ) I can´t always increase the weight. _



Drop the weight down.  

Say your doing 3 sets of 8 reps with 150lbs.  Drop the weight down to 110lbs. for 3 sets of 8 reps and slowly add weight every week.  Same idea for all exercises.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Jun 2, 2004)

How would lifting less weight increase strength?


----------



## Mudge (Jun 2, 2004)

Vieope said:
			
		

> _Is there a way to put in a few lines the principles of Westside training? _


It would not be enough to describe it to the point where you could likely recreate a program similar. Search it, been posted many times lately.


----------



## SquatBenchDead (Jun 2, 2004)

Saturday Fever said:
			
		

> How would lifting less weight increase strength?



You need to use submaximal weight, increasing every week so your body knows it must handle heavier weight each workout.  Of course you will eventually use maximal weight, but this is only during the peak of a training cycle.  

It works every time.  Why do you think so many people get stuck with the same training weight.  They train to failure with the same weight all the time.  You'll just spin your wheels.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Jun 2, 2004)

That's just not true. I always lift as much as I possibly can and I always progress. The key to strength training is doing it right. Westside is how you do it right. Anything else is a waste of everyone's time.


----------



## SquatBenchDead (Jun 3, 2004)

Close minded.  

I did powerlifting comp's too.  633-418-611 @ 198

Westside


----------



## Twin Peak (Jun 3, 2004)

Vieope said:
			
		

> _Your body went through a change, therefore it can lift heavier._
> _What changed in your body to make you lift heavier? _


CNS adaptation.

Muscle fibers can change from one type to another, depending on training style.

How your body recruits muscle fibers, and their efficiency can change.

How the muscle fibers fire, individually, and collectively, can change.

Etc.

Simply take a gander at the physiques of powerlifters versus the physiques of bodybuilders, and you quickly see that while correlated the two are not linear, as Mudge said on page 1.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 3, 2004)

Twin Peak said:
			
		

> CNS adaptation.


_I always see discussion about the importance of CNS, some say that it is better to train before it crash, some say the opposite. Is there a final word about it ? What should I know about CNS ?

Some drugs that are used as analgesics (something like morphine) can depress or stimulate the CNS, are they good for anything on training ? Thanks  _


----------



## Saturday Fever (Jun 3, 2004)

Ever load up the bar for bench and think to yourself, "Man I don't know..." and then failed on the lift?

 Ever hit a new PR that you struggled for weeks to hit? And the next time you lift that weight you throw it up like it's nothing?

 Both are strong examples of the control your CNS has on your lifting. The key with strength training and your CNS is to train your CNS to deal with heavy, low reps. Often times, just by switching to the Westside ME method, people will add 40lb in 2 weeks to their bench. Simply because they stopped doing sets of 6-8 and started doing triples and singles. I wish I wasn't sitting at work under a deadline or I'd try to expand on that.


----------



## gopro (Jun 3, 2004)

I think that TP has provided the most complete answer.

As far as the CNS goes, just imagine how easily you would break a PR if someone held a gun to your head and told you that he would blow your brains out if you didn't make the lift.

The example is extreme, yes, but shows how the CNS and its function can influence strength...almost instantly.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 3, 2004)

gopro said:
			
		

> As far as the CNS goes, just imagine how easily you would break a PR if someone held a gun to your head and told you that he would blow your brains out if you didn't make the lift.
> 
> The example is extreme, yes, but shows how the CNS and its function can influence strength...almost instantly.


_That is a very good example. We always hear that people in difficult situations develop a unbelievable strength. _


----------



## camarosuper6 (Jun 3, 2004)

Thats true. Adreneline is a wonderful example of a chemical that can temporarily increase your strength, but it doesnt mean you suddenly have more muscle.

 My brother and I are a good example.  My bro is a big guy, roughly 6'1 maybe 235. He trains according to the basic HIT guidelines, and is quite a bit stronger that me in most lifts (especially power lifts).  His physique resembles that of a powerlifter or a strongman competitor.  (I do not know if this is purely genetic, or a compliment to his training style, or both, but I would probably say both.)

 Me on the other hand, uses less weight, higher reps and higher volume, although usually no more than 3, 4 at the most sets per exercise. I usually rep range anywhere from 4 ( low end) and 10 ( high end).  I am about 6'3 and weigh roughly 215.  Now, my physique is more vascular, and aesthetic and my muscles are harder (density) than my brothers. He is larger and blockier than I am, but I have still a good amount of muscle,although he is stronger than me in the core lifts.

 What I want to know is why people bash HIT so much. My brother is pretty huge, and very strong.  He trains Mentzer HIT style, very low volume and his strength is increasing as is his size. So muscle and size may not be directly coorelated, but it seems to be (for him at least) the fastest way to obtain size is by training for strength?

 What I wanna know is why this style of training doesnt seem to do this for more people?


----------



## Mudge (Jun 3, 2004)

camarosuper6 said:
			
		

> What I want to know is why people bash HIT so much.


A very skinny guy I know uses it, I believe he is 6'1" and 205 after some M1T. He loves it to death, only hits the gym ONE day a week. He feels Westside is an inferior version of HIT, but you can't argue with results, they both put out some heavy  hitters. HIT though was geared more towards natural lifters which this guy primarily is (180 natural test level with one nut), he does static deads and benches with big numbers.

HIT never got to really explore speed lifts.


----------



## gopro (Jun 3, 2004)

Vieope said:
			
		

> _That is a very good example. We always hear that people in difficult situations develop a unbelievable strength. _


It happens everyday, and CAN be applied to your training with practice.


----------



## Vieope (Jun 3, 2004)

camarosuper6 said:
			
		

> What I wanna know is why this style of training doesnt seem to do this for more people?


_What I wanna know is how people that don´t work out but do some sport like running, biking, ballet, soccer develop good and impressive muscles. _


----------



## Mudge (Jun 3, 2004)

Impressive to who? Sprinters DO lift weights, those are the only impressive bodies I'd say of the bunch, other than soccer legs.

Ballet, they are on their calves all day long dude, and great forces is required to leap and great force over short periods of time is POWER.


----------



## ToxicAvenger (Jun 4, 2004)

Mudge said:
			
		

> I dont agree really, I'm about as strong as a 137 pound national level powerlifter. I can maintain size and gain some strength, if I restricted my calories I am sure I could continue to lose weight and maintain strength to some degree.
> 
> Some genetics, and some tricks thrown in there.
> 
> I would say there can be some kind of relationship in general but there is no direct line.


Mudge, would you mind explaining how you keep such a low body weight but keep adding strength.  I would like to add as much strength as possible, with as little weight as possible.  I currently do pyramid training.  Is this bad for what I am trying to accomplish.  Or is it the calories that you eat that is the main factor?  Any help would be appreciated.


----------



## CowPimp (Jun 4, 2004)

ToxicAvenger said:
			
		

> Mudge, would you mind explaining how you keep such a low body weight but keep adding strength. I would like to add as much strength as possible, with as little weight as possible. I currently do pyramid training. Is this bad for what I am trying to accomplish. Or is it the calories that you eat that is the main factor? Any help would be appreciated.


Do a search for Westside training.  That is the most talked about strength training routine around on these forums.


----------



## ToxicAvenger (Jun 5, 2004)

I would use that program but i need strong arms for my sport (wrestling) and westside or at least from how i looked at it does not include armwork.  I realize that other excercises in westside will increase armstrength but i need to get them as strong as possible.


----------



## Saturday Fever (Jun 5, 2004)

Westside certainly involves the arms. It does not directly work the biceps, using a vanilla routine, but that really doesn't matter given the amount of rowing the routine entails. I think you'll find that most powerlifters have extremely large arms, despite what you perceive to be a lack of arm work. I'd be happy to help you workout a 9 week routine to try it out. Or there are a multitude of articles at www.elitefts.com on the subject.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 5, 2004)

ToxicAvenger said:
			
		

> Mudge, would you mind explaining how you keep such a low body weight but keep adding strength.


I would be the wrong person to ask, but a national level powerlifter who is benching 385 or whatever @ 137 pounds is not going to be drug free. I am not light and being tall, would not likely do well very light either, I was 266 the last time I weighed myself.

Caloric control, drugs, + smart powerlifting is how someone would do it. If you dont want to gain weight then dont eat more.

http://www.wannabebig.com/article.php?articleid=46

Competition lifters are also allowed to use dual ply shirts, and squat suits.


----------



## ToxicAvenger (Jun 5, 2004)

Saturday fever, I appreciate the offer, but I am going to wait a little bit until i become a little more experienced with lifting before I begin westside training.  It is definateley something I will do though.

And Mudg, I misread one of your earlier posts where you said you were about as strong as a 137 lb powerlifter
Saturday fever, I appreciate the offer, but I am going to wait a little bit until i become a little more experienced with lifting before I begin westside training.  It is definateley something I will do though.

And Mudg, I misread one of your earlier posts where you said you were about as strong as a 137 lb national powerlifter, I took it as if you weighd 137 pounds.  My mistake.


----------



## Mudge (Jun 5, 2004)

ToxicAvenger said:
			
		

> And Mudg, I misread one of your earlier posts where you said you were about as strong as a 137 lb national powerlifter, I took it as if you weighd 137 pounds. My mistake.


If I were 5'2" maybe I would but I'm 6'2" so I absolutely dont want to even be under 200 pounds  I like being strong but it is not my sole goal. If you look at my avatar, I'm heavier than that pic, so I'm definitely not 137 pounds 

Good luck


----------

