Strength Vs. Size

I don't understand how can size and strength be two partially different things? Shouldn't size always corellate to strength? If you have 20000 muscle fibers in your bicep then your bicep is stronger than the dude with 19000 muscle fibers. What's the catch?

Attached: 20150103232734-Farnese_Hercules_ecorche_anatomy_illustration.jpg (640x488, 214K)

CNS conditioning. Muscle density. Joints & leverage.

What about them?

myofibrillar vs sarcoplasmic hypertrophy

yeah this answer everything
this board is dog shit

Attached: 1547851516783.jpg (900x900, 60K)

Big people are strong, there is no 6'6 300lb roid monster who has weak lifts.
People spout that stupid line to discourage people from ignoring certain muscle groups for aesthetics. The classic gym rat V taper is prime example.

Can someone explain these instead of just posting names?

Correlations are strong between a larger muscle (say chest) and a stronger movement (bp) BUT it is not only muscular size but motor neuron recruitment that are necessary for strength. Powerlifters do hypertrophy, the strength, then powerlifting blocks to gain more muscle and then improve recruitment of it for lifts closer to a 1rm. The lesson is to define your goal and train accordingly.

>google
Size isn't the only thing contributing to overall strength, but it definitely helps. There isn't anyone who by increasing their size wouldn't improve their strength

Strength = size of muscle * neural adaptations. So just a fun mini info dump : Strength is more skill than anything else. Not just pure mass which is why even lower intensity things can build strength. Improves factors like recruitment (amount of motor units for contraction used), coordination - the ability of fibres within a muscle to contract in sync for maximal force (intra muscular) and the ability of different muscle groups to work together for a particular exercise (inter muscular). Firing rate - the reduction in time between firing the signals to contract the muscles. Faster rate = more force and lastly basic motor control which is the skill component like you'd develop if you were learning to juggle.

it would be inefficient to activate every bicep fiber every time you want to scratch your nose. its not an on/off thing
muscles can be used more/less efficiently
fibre group recruitment or something

How to condition cns

lift heavy shit

How do you learn to ride a bike? Repetition.

It is the same for the most part. One Person deadlifting more and another curling more means just that, they are better at those specific lifts because they use them more often.

Perfect practice makes perfect. Above exposition that described the different neural adaptations. Ibe answered the thread. What else is there to say?

Genetics determine both. If you have really good genetics then you can be very strong and not be that big at all. If you don't have really good genetics then your strength will most likely correlate to your size and you will have to get much bigger to be much stronger.

On this basis there is someone who is much smaller than you who will be much stronger than you, even though you are much bigger than them.
If you want to get really strong, regardless of what you have been given by God, start CNS training, that shit will change you forever.

Got anything to back that up?

Attached: Screenshot_20190125-222953.png (720x1280, 174K)

How? I want to be changed, molded.

Muscle Density is a big part of it. Just take a look at any cyclist or distance runner, especially if the cyclist is a hill-climber. Climbing cyclists are usually fairly tall and lanky, but I guarantee you they can out-squat anyone else in their weight group.

>start CNS training, that shit will change you forever.
this and better reading comprehension.

Or get in to any religion which believes in reincarnation and say a pray then commit suicide, hoping you are reborn with better genetics.

There's dozens of anecdotes of little old ladies lifting cars and such to save someone or under extreme adrenaline. Which follows from you actually having enough muscle to lift far more than you think you can, if it is all recruited at maximum efficiency. You ordinarily can't do that because too much and at some point you'd be treating tendons and causing too much damage. But you can get a bit more efficient at the recruitment/strength skill by practicing it. Look up strength as a skill.

So a complete beginner could add huge amounts to their 1RM in a matter of weeks, without any substantial muscle gain to go along with it. They get better at lifting heavy things by adapting to the skill, the neuro-part of neuro-muscular adaptation being able to occur faster. Especially noticeable and useful in skills like juggling or marksmanship, where there isn't really a related stimulus for muscle gains instead it's the control and coordination.

This is true except its sarcoplasmic volume not hypertrophy because humans havn't evolved that way yet. And for everyone asking for an explanation use fucking google and look for credible sources for studies. Fucking newfags

Does speed == endurance?
Different muscle fibers mate. Getting big will get you stronger and getting stronger will get you bigger. However, with regards to the statistical outliers, training strength increases muscle density, not mass, while training size will increase mass and vascularity but not density.

>CNS training
What do?

1. neural adaptations dominate in the first phase(s) of a trainees career.
2. however, once you're about 85% of the way to your genetic max - which can and will change with certain things, which complicates issues - muscle size becomes the main driver of improvement in strength.
3. then there's the question of vitamin S

dont fall for the "sarcoplasmic" bullshit. the bodybuilders of the 60s and 70s were stronger than anyone you'll come across on /fit or most fitness websites in the current year.