Do you agree with him Jow Forums?

his social media accounts are handled by a 17 year old girl.
(whom he fucks, when he has time.)

Not really. A lot of people just don't have the genetics for roids and they'll look like weak-ass shits even on test+deca.

>A lot of people just don't have the genetics for roids

You're delusional. And you think those same people who can't even look good on roids are gonna look good by staying natty?

I really don’t know, certified natties don’t go by this saying, they say ‘just lift heavy if you want to see some changes’ which makes sense, why would your body create huge muscles that requires tons of calories to maintain just to lift baby weights, even if slowed and controlled reps.
But on the other side, cavill seems to have high test, and people like cavaliere, jeff nippard, all claiming natty, look close to the natty limit and can’t stop talking about the mind/muscle connection, but their natty status is questionnable, so I really don’t know

This.
Weights really did nothing much for me except improve my definition until I started actual strength training i.e. doing sets of 2/3 reps at 90%+
Form also got a whole lot better even though obviously it would break down at in the last reps of the last sets of a heavy session. I figure you can't really improve your technique without letting your body figure out what good it does to you when you're at your limit.
Now I don't see myself that big but normies literally won't stop commenting on how thick I am

Cope

Of course I agree with him, muscle gain is 99% genetics so matter what workout he did he would look close to the same as he does now.

99% of your body is genetics, he could be benching 135lbs or 315lbs for his workout and he'll look the same

>implying he isn't on some $20000 super diet for uber gains

They'll look like shit either way, so why waste money on roids when you can spend it on a noose?

Nope. Only part I agree with is don't worry about what weight the guy next to you is lifting. I couldn't squat 50kg for 5when I started lifting 6 weeks ago. Felt a little shitty when three women were squatting 80kg in the rack next to me. 6 weeks later and weighing 21lbs more, I'm squating 95kg for three sets of 5. Just focussing on me. Still not strong, but almost 2pl8 squat, which I never thought my puny ass would ever do.

Gay

To be more relatable to the plebs

Fucking actor
>advise from clown

That’s actually not true
Time under tension has been shown to he a very weak factor in terms of muscle growth compared to weight or volume
As long as the movement is “controlled” ofc

>he will never be your gymbro

Attached: its not fair.gif (220x165, 318K)

I think everyone missed what he actually meant in his post. He's not saying doing light weight is better than heavy weight or volume vs strength.
He's saying be consistent in your workouts. Doesn't matter if you're tired, busy, w/e. Even doing a little bit (whether it's light weight or light volume) will result in progress and results as long as you put in the effort.
Don't feel intimidated by others cause you're not pushing heavy weights. You'll get there eventually.

And this makes sense. Being consistent in your workouts is the most important factor in seeing results. It doesn't matter what your program is.

No way in hell you look like that when training with those weights.

That’s bad but if it makes you feel any better some girls are just insane at squats because they’re trying to get a nice ass so that’s the only exercise they do.

Give me 20lbs dumbbell and i give you 20 inch arms.
The rest of the body is different though, you need heavy weights for thick lats and pecs. Legs are a mixed bag, ive seen guys with 28"+ that dont even train them

This motherfucker uses steroids like every fag on hollywood
>inb4heisnotthatbig
Yeah no shit

hypertrophy happens as long as you are going near failure, so yes it's possible. It's not really efficient though

I don't know whether or not i agree with him yet, but I'm currently running an experiment on myself to see if the light dumbbell system works.
I recently picked up a pdf of Sandow's books on training (Eugen Sandow is the father of bodybuilding, a strongman from the time before steroids for those who dont know) He had a great physique for the time and the silly exercises he did, and he swore up and down that light dumbbells was the way he achieved muscle mass. Thing was, he used them everyday, using 5 pound dumbells to help him flex and activate the muscles directly as hard as he could, for 50-100 reps. Sort of maximizing the mind-muscle connection with no in between. More of a daily moving meditation than a modern workout.
I've decided to incorporate this into my daily routine a couple weeks ago doing an upper, lower split and making sure every muscle im exercising is activated every day. It hasn't been long, but I've made surprising gains in a short amount of time. In strength and hypertrophy, so the light dumbbell system might actually aid in shortening recovery time, by promoting blood flow and whatnot.

I might make a thread about my findings when I'm finished, if anyone can make any use of this as an additional supplement to their routine.
It is surprisingly fucking difficult and exhausting though, as a word of warning. Added to an already effective workout, you almost need to supplement and eat plenty to not keel over when first implementing it.

Attached: 4EADB3C1-66F6-4AB8-BDBC-E1F16A4C3169.jpg (544x841, 48K)

Check out Greg Nuckols podcasts.

They recently covered that doing very low weights for very high reps was a terrible way to train. Like 20% of 1rm.

You'd be better off doing something like 50% or even 40% with super slow eccentrics.

On my experience, a mix of moving big weights quickly and smaller weights more slowly has led to good gains.

215/130/250 @88kg here

He kind of mixes two good statements into one retarded one

>Dont be ashamed of a low starting weight, you will get up there with the heavy weights
>If you cant go to the gym for whatever reason, workout to the best of your ability (for example body weight excersizes), its better than not working out

>Is he dumb?
Yes, he spent all his character points on cha and str

>why not both
user you are too stupid to post things. leave.

replace "workouts" with "steroids" to turn this into the truth.

So this is what a broscientist looks like huh. You don't build muscle lifting like a faggot pussy, you either get strong and increase weight or you remain small. That's all, you get strong, white fibers, explosive reps, fast reps, good form, 5 or less reps, deadlifts, squats, ohp, bench. Get strong bitch, then you can do your faggot bodybuilding shit. Guess what? Strength is there to stay, and it's easy to get back if you stop lifting. That's what we call myofibrillar hypertrophy then you have sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, both always overlap, the later is fake tho, it's temporary, myofibrillar is real, it's there to stay. Fag, you dont know shit.

I will!
Of course, actually testing this sort of thing is difficult to say the least. There's no guarantee of proper methodology and execution of exercise/concentration over such a long period of time. Even with eeg, it's annoying to record that consistently over a long period of time, even rarer to be coupled with proper nutrition and recovery. I haven't heard of Nuckols before, so I'll withhold judgement until i actually hear the podcast.
Thank you user!

>hypertrophy happens as long as you are going near failure, so yes it's possible. It's not really efficient though
no it doesn't
if there's no damage to the sarcomere, there's no impetus for either hypertrophy or hyperplasia
if you do 0lb for infinity reps, the max you're doing is depleting creatine phosphate and ATP. either he's a fucking liar and does heavy sets off-camera and posted this because his publicist told him it would make him "relatable" and "not look like a gym rat" or he's just got blown up muscles from lots of sarcoplasm.

>On my experience, a mix of moving big weights quickly and smaller weights more slowly has led to good gains.
your gains are coming from moving the big weights.
moving small weights does not provide sufficient stress on the musculoskeletal system to induce either hypertrophy or hyperplasia.
Bruce Lee incorporated a fuckton of isometric exercises, which is essentially what you and are describing. However, he was not large.
Isometrics arguably help develop better innervation for untrained and novice athletes and can be a good supplement to lifting heavy weights, but in the end, applying concentric stress in a 1-6 rep range above what your muscles are adapted to is what drives adaptation

If you only train heavy for every exercise you're going to have a bad time.

I appreciate what you're saying but it would be a sub par programme to leave out some higher rep e.g. 12 rep sets for shoulders, biceps, calves etc.

>frame and genetics matter more than the weights
biggest cope ive seen today