Can you become strong with only bodyweight and dumbbells?

>What is progressive calisthenics
Doing this stuff to failure will make you stronger and bigger if you're weak and small. It's not the best way to progress long term though.

Attached: 1560794804006.jpg (714x527, 51K)

>works for me
Fuck off, seems to me you have bigger problems like the angry little man syndrome.

Napoleon complex doesn't exist, just fyi. It is (literally) a Jewish invention.

>What is progressive calisthenics
A waste of time, that's what it is
if you wanna get gains you just gonna recruit your muscles to their maximum capacity, meaning muscular failure, it's how everyone has ever made muscle gains, doing some fancy bodyweight tricks doesn't do much except look cool.
>progress
as long as you reach muscular failure progress is a meaningless term
going from regualr pushups to hindu pushups doesn't make the exercise harder just different, going from pushups to one arm pushups doesn't make the exercise harder just different, as long as you train to muscular failure.
>stronger and bigger
if you are worried about strength then maybe lifting weights is a good idea, getting bigger though is determined by genetics and drugs and diet, as long as you train to muscular failure your muscles don't give a fuck about how you are using them.
A set of regular pushups to muscular failure is as hard as a set of one arm pushups to muscular failure.

the golden one is such a fucking fag

post body
post kids
post wife

>A set of regular pushups to muscular failure is as hard as a set of one arm pushups to muscular failure.
I agree that muscle failure is muscle failure. I doubt you'd advise anyone to bench press bar alone till failure though.

When it comes to strength somebody who can do one arm push-ups will be able to do a lot of regular ones but somebody who does only the regular ones won't be necessarily able to do any one arm push-ups at all. Doing the same excercise with the same weight and technique will make you better at that excercise but the benefits will be negligible after some time.

>I doubt you'd advise anyone to bench press bar alone till failure though.
yeah, because reaching actual muscular failure is essentially impossible with that ammount of resistance
I can however reach muscular failure in the 60-90 rep range on pushups, I tried going to failure with a 20kg barbell and I had to quit because of the pain, it's a completely different physical endavour, your fast twitch big muscle fibers don't even get used at all unless you're close to failure.

>When it comes to strength somebody who can do one arm push-ups will be able to do a lot of regular ones but somebody who does only the regular ones won't be necessarily able to do any one arm push-ups at all. Doing the same excercise with the same weight and technique will make you better at that excercise but the benefits will be negligible after some time.
That's the thing though, the problem isn't doing the same weight and reps and sets with the same form, the problem is not keeping up the effort in your training, your strength will never go up all the time every session after your noob gains, does that mean that the training sessions you're in in which you fail to do more weight or reps are useless and give you 0 gains? no, that's an idiotic assumption which I don't believe you actually hold dear.
The reason why "progressive overload" is essential is because it forces you to keep total ammount and degree of effort, this however is already put in practise if you make the decision to train to muscular failure, the act of training close or to actual muscular failure is what gives you muscle gains, if in one week you're feeling weaker due to stress and fatigue just because you did less reps doesn't mean you are gonna make 0 or negative gains from that training week, just means that you are fatigued and thus the experienced resistance is acting as if it was a much higher resistance, the stimulation is the same even if the performance is not.

Prince Anduin?

>Doing the same excercise with the same weight and technique will make you better at that excercise but the benefits will be negligible after some time.
this goes against anecdote and the literature we have, muscle growth is the same with 30% 1RM and 80 % 1RM to muscular failure the only thing that is clearly different is strength potentiation, but the degree of myofibrillar muscle protein synthesis from both load parameters is the same when training to muscular failure.

You will only get as strong as your heaviest dumbell.

>got serious anxiety issues though so going to the gym is no option for me until i fixed that.
try exposure therapy (i.e. go to the gym)

not a fag. just narcissistic tendencies. other than that hes based.

Attached: Screenshot_1.png (940x603, 1.05M)

I see that we pretty much agree then. My only gripe with your approach to calisthenics is that it's fairly inefficient (doesn't mean it doesn't work though). Yeah you can do ~90 reps of standard push-ups. Doing harder progression would keep you in lower rep range and therefore saving time (why don't have unlimited time to train after all).

> I tried going to failure with a 20kg barbell and I had to quit because of the pain
I had similar problem with high rep Calisthenics. I screw up my shoulder which put me out of training for a week.

Different methods for different people I suppose.

I fully agree with the second part of your post regarding effort.

Attached: 1560366886139.jpg (1437x1437, 859K)

FUARK MIRIN
Needs to grow his beard back out. Right now it's boomer geology teacher tier.

Not really. Perhaps instead of negligible it should have said diminishing (returns). It's simply more efficient to work in a lower rep ranges (doesn't mean other methods don't work, they simply aren't as optimal)

Attached: Screenshot_2019-06-21-11-03-59-671_com.chrome.beta.jpg (465x429, 52K)

>likes faggots and trannies
>based

link?