d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > Sports Coliseum > Health & Fitness >
Poll > Compound Movements Vs. Isolation Exercises
123Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
  Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.
Member
Posts: 825
Joined: Jan 14 2013
Gold: 120.00
Oct 11 2014 11:14am
Additionally, Strength training Vs. Hypertrophy training.?

Thoughts?
Member
Posts: 17,504
Joined: Mar 11 2007
Gold: 293.30
Oct 11 2014 11:15am
Quote (DaBearJew @ Oct 11 2014 02:14pm)
Additionally, Strength training Vs. Hypertrophy training.?

Thoughts?


need more details

its self explanitory
Member
Posts: 825
Joined: Jan 14 2013
Gold: 120.00
Oct 11 2014 11:18am
Quote (Zark @ Oct 11 2014 11:15am)
need more details

its self explanitory


Pros and cons, which one do people on this forum prefer, what movements allow for greatest progress with the least chance for injury etc....
Member
Posts: 23,919
Joined: Aug 2 2008
Gold: 165.00
Oct 11 2014 11:24am
gud 1
Member
Posts: 50,002
Joined: Apr 22 2008
Gold: Locked
Trader: Scammer
Oct 11 2014 11:25am
pros of compounds are mainly time cost efficiency, CNS efficiency, stabilizers and core mini-muscles that are usually overlooked getting worked, force couple in barbell exercises.
cons of compounds can be overly taxiing the CNS, inability to distinguish PPO torque primes from movement agonists (whereas can be done in isolations), weaker muscle predominance, faster fatigue, lack of variety or focus on separate muscle groups.

don't get your post question though, strength or hyp is a personal choice.

recent compilation of the articles thread: http://forums.d2jsp.org/topic.php?t=69291089&f=60&p=480674889
Member
Posts: 825
Joined: Jan 14 2013
Gold: 120.00
Oct 11 2014 11:30am
i guess its more of a question of the age old argument, aesthetics or performance, and im really just taking a little survey to see what the people of jsp go for. I personally do performance training, aesthetics are nice and all and yes bodybuilders are strong but hypertrophy to me doesn't seem viable in the real world

Broken down, looking big but not being that strong does not compute

im glad to say i don't think i saw my first question on that list.
Member
Posts: 4,628
Joined: Oct 2 2010
Gold: 11.58
Oct 11 2014 11:41am
Quote (DaBearJew @ Oct 11 2014 01:30pm)
i guess its more of a question of the age old argument, aesthetics or performance, and im really just taking a little survey to see what the people of jsp go for. I personally do performance training, aesthetics are nice and all and yes bodybuilders are strong but hypertrophy to me doesn't seem viable in the real world

Broken down, looking big but not being that strong does not compute

im glad to say i don't think i saw my first question on that list.


realistically, aesthetic progress is a by-product of metabolic adaptation in working tissue. performance increases are seen with both types of training, but the performance outcomes are different. when we consider that both will stimulate MPS to some degree it kind of comes down to neural development vs metabolic adaptation and both are useful in performance, but each are task-specific

e: you need to get away from thinking that big muscular guys are not strong because its simply not true. yeah maybe they could be a bit stronger with no change in body mass but there is still a DIRECT PROPORTIONAL (or nearly) relationship between muscle CSA and torque development, which is modified by muscle architecture/fiber composition/neural drive etc

This post was edited by cloudkicker on Oct 11 2014 11:42am
Member
Posts: 825
Joined: Jan 14 2013
Gold: 120.00
Oct 11 2014 11:42am
Very interesting thoughts. Other Jsp members, come share yours.

Quote (cloudkicker @ Oct 11 2014 11:41am)
realistically, aesthetic progress is a by-product of metabolic adaptation in working tissue. performance increases are seen with both types of training, but the performance outcomes are different. when we consider that both will stimulate MPS to some degree it kind of comes down to neural development vs metabolic adaptation and both are useful in performance, but each are task-specific

e: you need to get away from thinking that big muscular guys are not strong because its simply not true. yeah maybe they could be a bit stronger with no change in body mass but there is still a DIRECT PROPORTIONAL (or nearly) relationship between muscle CSA and torque development, which is modified by muscle architecture/fiber composition/neural drive etc


i don't think that at all. i even said bodybuilders are strong... and i completely get that.

This post was edited by DaBearJew on Oct 11 2014 11:44am
Member
Posts: 9,226
Joined: Sep 9 2007
Gold: 1.00
Oct 11 2014 11:45am
I don't understand the relationship between topic title and poll questions. Is there one?
Member
Posts: 825
Joined: Jan 14 2013
Gold: 120.00
Oct 11 2014 11:46am
Quote (StedieMonster @ Oct 11 2014 11:45am)
I don't understand the relationship between topic title and poll questions. Is there one?


it was a secondary question i asked in the thread, then decided to add the poll
Go Back To Health & Fitness Topic List
123Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll