Question about gaining weight

[waynejohn]

cffrmw,

Sorry your thread got taken over by pointless bickering. Espi knows what he is talking about. I personally would listen to him.

 

[CarlitosWay]

Thanks for posting your training routine...I was more interested in your DIET...but since you took time to post, I'll respond...Imy replies in bold.

I agree with Espi, if I'm trying to gain mass, the last thing I want to be doing is circuits with light weights. That's better suited for fat people or those trying to shed some quick fat.

Some form of progression in reps or weights is key no matter the routine be it bodybuilding, powerlifting.

As for CaptainJ. Those two guys don't compete in powerlifting/olympic lifting. For Stances chosen their depth is acceptable. Those squats to me are impressive as hell none-the-less. To say they're training improperly, risking injury, etc etc cause they didn't squat an inch or two deeper is well kind of funny hahaha. I've have read both their logs extensively, they've been training seriously for years upon years compared to you and me combined.

*big impressive guy squats huge weights just shy of parallel* *smaller, weaker guy walks up* "Yeah dude that's some good weight and all but you're like not hitting parallel, thus training improperly, I think you're kind inflating your ego too and dude you're so going to hurt yourself one day....." Sad thing is this **** really does happen :/

EDIT: Also Captain are you still a 160 lbs @ 6'2 ? . What kind of progress have you made in the last year?

 

[CaptainJ]

I agree with Espi, if I'm trying to gain mass, the last thing I want to be doing is circuits with light weights. That's better suited for fat people or those trying to shed some quick fat.

Some form of progression in reps or weights is key no matter the routine be it bodybuilding, powerlifting.

As for CaptainJ. Those two guys don't compete in powerlifting/olympic lifting. For Stances chosen their depth is acceptable. Those squats to me are impressive as hell none-the-less. To say they're training improperly, risking injury, etc etc cause they didn't squat an inch or two deeper is well kind of funny hahaha. I've have read both their logs extensively, they've been training seriously for years upon years compared to you and me combined.

*big impressive guy squats huge weights just shy of parallel* *smaller, weaker guy walks up* "Yeah dude that's some good weight and all but you're like not hitting parallel, thus training improperly, I think you're kind inflating your ego too and dude you're so going to hurt yourself one day....." Sad thing is this **** really does happen :/

EDIT: Also Captain are you still a 160 lbs @ 6'2 ? . What kind of progress have you made in the last year?

6'2 196lbs

Squat - 105kg
Deadlift - 130
OHP - 50
Bench - 77.5
Power Clean - 72.5

Most of my progress has come in the past 2 months when i finally got access to a power rack (don't ask how i managed to squat before)

As for those guys, if they ain't competing, then i don't give a sh1t, but it's when someone is teaching people to not squat below parallel, then I have problems with that. Oh and those couple of inches make a huge difference, there's no concept of "The Hole" when you do a half squat.

 

[CarlitosWay]

6'2 196lbs

Squat - 105kg
Deadlift - 130
OHP - 50
Bench - 77.5
Power Clean - 72.5

Most of my progress has come in the past 2 months when i finally got access to a power rack (don't ask how i managed to squat before)

As for those guys, if they ain't competing, then i don't give a sh1t, but it's when someone is teaching people to not squat below parallel, then I have problems with that. Oh and those couple of inches make a huge difference, there's no concept of "The Hole" when you do a half squat.

One trains more for aesthetics/size and the other more for performance cause of his job duties (counter-terrorism). Like I mentioned before they're using stances best suited for them and their goals.

Your numbers seem a bit weak for your size. I'd imagine some one at your size would have pretty much double those numbers.

EDIT: @ Kerpal, you ****in' kidding me? Those are indeed just shy of parallel you're a freakin' dweeb if you're that anal to not see that. Paul Anderson used to squat real heavy weights high and over time would gradually go deeper (he had some interesting methods), it's a great tool to gr get used to squatting heavier weights. So I guess he didn't know wtf he was doing and he's lucky he didn't mess up his knees right?

Olympic lifters have raised heels on their shoes thus helping them get deeper easily or a board under the heels works good too.

If some one just wants big legs and squats impressive weights for reps just shy of parallel. He's still going to grow some big ass legs and no he's not going "mess" up his knees. Bad form and bouncing around uncontrollably with weights strains the knees, not hitting super deep reps doesn't LOL, too funny

There was nothing wrong with their techniques, depth wasn't super deep but technique was there. One was a high bar narrow stance bodybuilding squat and the other a real wide lower bar powerlifting type squat. Both still impressive by all means. It's working for their goals.


EDIT#2
Here's a concrete study done on mean and peak activation in musculature used when squatting yes all these are SQUATS, half squats, parallel squats, full squats and quarter squats, doesn't matter. The discrepancies are not that BIG. The half squat actually yielded a bit more glute, quad and hamstring involvement than the full squat. As the full squat yielded slightly better performance. Like I mentioned before different stances and different depths apply to an individuals goals. To discredit as not a squat because of a slight depth issues well is just dumb. If you want bigger legs a narrow stance going to just parallel or shy of it it is suffice. IF you want increased performance for a sport a full squat will give you slightly better results.

The bottom line I think all depths have their purpose and one should utilize all if big legs is their goals. Some sports just train the top portion of a squat the half squat or quarter squat, cause most likely in their sport they rarely go into a full squat. e.g. volley ball players.

This was done via electrodes literally attached to all the muscles involved. The top number refers more to muscle tension placed and the second to peak contraction of mentioned muscle.

http://www.tmuscle.com/free_online_article_issue/issue_623#inside-the-muscles

 

[EFFORT]

Move the debate here guys

http://www.sosuave.net/forum/showthread.php?t=174051

 

[EFFORT]

Don't want to bore you with my exact situation, so I'll make this short. I've been hitting the gym 2 to 5 times a week for the last year - I'm a student so sometimes I cut days when tests are coming up. I haven't been eating like I should so the weight gains haven't been coming like I would hope.

This summer, however, I want to gain weight. I have 100 days where I can focus on that, and then back to college. That's 14 weeks. How much is a healthy per week weight gain, so I know what to shoot for? I won't be in school so I can hit the gym 5 times a week, I usually go for about an hour and it's an intense workout.

I currently weight 165 (up 15 lbs from a year ago), and I'm 6'2 so yeah I'm still pretty skinny. I know a pound a week is fine, but is two pounds too much? If I could be 190 with most of it muscle at the end of the summer that would be awesome and put me at the exact weight I want to be.

Also, I assume following the simple starting diet in the "Where to Start" post should be fine?

You still around cffrmw? the fire should be gone now

Whats the situation with your training now? What is your estimated bodyfat, can you see abs? Post up your diet.