White_Savage
Mentor
Quote, reflecting standard modern strength training theory:
"Strength training concerns itself with re-training the nervous system, so as to be able to contract muscles harder. Heavy weights and low reps are the order of the day. This leads to myofibrillar hypertrophy--functional muscle growth, which produces dense muscles which aren't necessarily huge, but are definitely strong & explosive. It should be stressed that individuals that train this way are also usually very fast and agile.
The high rep training that modern bodybuilders engage in, on the other hand, leads to sarcoplasmic hypertrophy--big muscles which aren't particularly strong or otherwise useful, other than in the narcissistic sense."
But wouldn't the bodyweight calesthenics reflect the latter, low-weight, high repetition? I've been doing these for a long time and I FEEL like I've gotten quicker, but could better results be achieved with weights? Or is their some aspect of theory I'm missing?
"Strength training concerns itself with re-training the nervous system, so as to be able to contract muscles harder. Heavy weights and low reps are the order of the day. This leads to myofibrillar hypertrophy--functional muscle growth, which produces dense muscles which aren't necessarily huge, but are definitely strong & explosive. It should be stressed that individuals that train this way are also usually very fast and agile.
The high rep training that modern bodybuilders engage in, on the other hand, leads to sarcoplasmic hypertrophy--big muscles which aren't particularly strong or otherwise useful, other than in the narcissistic sense."
But wouldn't the bodyweight calesthenics reflect the latter, low-weight, high repetition? I've been doing these for a long time and I FEEL like I've gotten quicker, but could better results be achieved with weights? Or is their some aspect of theory I'm missing?