Entrenamiento Culturista vs. de Fuerza

[sebarc]

Bueno esto es parte del gran debate entre entranamiento de fuerza y entrenamiento culturista. Ambos campos sostienen que su entrenamiento es el mejor lyle constesta desde su punto de visto y lo que aprendio de ambos campos.

Originally Posted by Lyle McDonald laying the smack down
Here's some examples for you Kelly, maybe this will help you wrap your brain around why I have a problem with strengthtrainer guy and your
attitude

1. Say I have a bodybuilder trying to bring up chest and the focus of
the day is on the clavicular portion. I'll start him with 4 sets of 6-8
on the incline bench, either straight weights or descending pyramid.
Ok, now I want a second chest exercise to get some work for the sternal
portion.

Strengthtraining guy sayz: isolation exercises are for fagz, do flat bench.

I say: Odds are this guy's triceps are trashed and he won't get much
for HIS CHEST out of flat bench. Cable crossover, DB flye or pec deck
for 3 sets of 10-12 is the more logical choice. At the next chest day
when the focus is on sternal portion, I'll have him start with 4 sets
of 6-8 flat bench and follow it with incline flye or incline crossover.


2. Say the same guy is trainin delts after chest and he can survive
incline and flat bench. Now his triceps are really trashed. What do I
have him do for medial delts.

Strengthtraining guy sayz: isolation exercises are for fagz, do military press.

I say: No, lateral raise makes more sense here, or upright row to
involve biceps. Maybe upright row + lateral raises to get a
comppound+isolation combination.


3. Say I have a guy who is just weak as hell overhead, bad leverages,
his triceps fatigue mroe quickly than his delts, whatever the reason.

Strengthtraining guy sayz: isolation exercises are for fagz, shoulder press builds the delts.

I say: No, this guy is unlikely to ever get anything out of overhead
pressing. If he has long arms, his delts may get the same (if not more)
tension from Db lateral raise or a lateral raise mchine where the
resistance is placed at the elbow.

Hell, even the WSBB guys do isolation stuff for their delts most days.


Remember kelly that, fundamentally, bodybuilding is about putting
tension on the muscle, strength training is as much about training the
nervous system as it is the musculature and a lot of strength training
is about improving leverages to move more weight.

It's simplistically incorrect to assume that more weight = more tension on the muscle.

Consider that, from the standpoint of the quads, a rock bottom high bar
squat may put far more tension on the quads than a power squat, even if
the high bar squat is many hundreds of pounds less weight on the bar.
Why? Changing mechanics.

Say I dead pause a squat. This will limit my poundages by eliminating
the SSC but may put more tension on my muscles trying to start it again.

Because of the long lever arm and isolation nature, a proerly done side
raise may put more tension on the medial delts than any overhead press.
It depends on the person, their biomechanics, etc.

Some more examples since you're probably still confused. Don't worry, I"ll use small words.


1. Say I have a guy who's fairly strong (by bodybuilder standards) who needs to bring up his quads.

Strengthtaining guy sayz: squats roolz, everything else droolz.

I say: Well, it depends. Let's say my guy is too strong to risk his
joints doing low reps. So I may have him doing repeat sets of 15. Well,
if he squats, we have two issues. The ifrst is that his low back may
limit his ability to stress his legs which does not serve the goal of
improving his quads. The second is that systemic fatigue from squatting
will rapidly become an issue. What sense does it make to limit tension
to his quads because he's gasping for air. Leg press makes more sense
here.


2. Or what if the same guy tends to overbuild his glutes with full squatting or deadlifting and it's throwing off his symmetry?

Strengthtraining guy sayz: squat full or don't squat at all.

I say: well, i I want to emphasize his quads, a partial squat or leg
press where I limit his rom (or even, gasp, a leg extension) allows me
to target his quads without involving the glutes.

What if I've got someone in a hamstring emphasis cycle. He may start
legs off with heavy SLDL and then some leg curls. how well is he going
to squat after that? Not well at all. I may do leg extensions for
maintenance work on quads even though strengthtraining guy says that
isolation exercises are for fagz.

Lest we forget, bodybuilding is about apperance and there are
considerations there that strength trainers don't have to worry about.
Not just symmetry and the rest but stuff like maximizing sarcoplasmic
hypertrophy (which may require the dreaded pump training at some point
in the training cycle).

I could sit here and come up with dozens more examples, hopefully the above is understandable to your little brain.

Now, do I disagree with many of strengthtrainer guys general points?
Not at all. As I said originally, some truisms, some gibberish in
there. Should most bodybuilders focus on strength gains? Yes. Should
they get rid of old school ascending pyramids. Yes, that stuff is
stupid. Does that mean that they should all just train like PL's? No.
But it's the attitude taken by strength training purists who can't see
past their own asshole.

I've seen guys who were OL purists set upbodybuilding routines around
the OL's. Why? Because they could'nt see past their own asshole either.
They are just myopic assholes who can't realize that any training
technique is just a tool with pros, cons and appropriate times to apply
it. Apparently you are too.

They are distinct sports (with admittedly a lot of overlap) with
distinct needs. Yo'ud have to be an idiot to think otherwise. And the
kind of absolutist statemetns about isolation movmeents or certain
types of training made by strengthtraining guy were simply moronic.

Lyle

[TheRekiem]

El tema que le veo a cómo enfrenta un entrenamiento y otro es que planeta objetivos de culturista (ahora deltoides, ahora pectorales, "Say I have a bodybuildertrying to bring up chest and the focus of the day is on the clavicular portion...") con ejercicios de fuerza.

Es obvio que si persigue unos fines estéticos - los que plantea durante todo el artículo - es preferible llevar a cabo una rutina destinada a ello.

Pero vamos, estoy de acuerdo con el meollo del asunto: los ejercicios son sólo eso, ejercicios, y cuales elegir dependen de las metas del usuario. Y lo mejor de todo es que se pueden combinar (ahí tenemos a Ronnie Coleman haciendo sentadillas "culo a tierra" y peso muerto) estupendamente.

[karkian]

Casi no le entiendo

[Hiperius]

En mi experiencia personal, sólo con ejercicios compuestos no se desarrollan correctamente todos los músculos y se crean desequilibrios. Asi pues, lógicamente me decanto por modelo culturista.

Un saludo.

[MR. KENNEDY]

La cuestion es cual es tu objebtivo incluso en que momento del año estes.

Si lo que quieres es "verte fuerte" ,estar musculoso, el sistema culturista es el mas adecuado, si quieres ser fuerte, entrena para fuerza.

Los resultados son evidentemente diferentes,los "powerlifters" suelen estar enormes pero no impresional mucho, tienen un poco pinta de gorditos y todo.

Los culturistas suelen estar mas definidos y un aspecto más llamativo y aunque son fuertes, no pueden competir con sus compañeros de pura fuerza.

Sin embargo puedes combinar los dos metodos de entrenamiento, un culturista se puede beneficioar de ciclar 6 u ocho semans de entrenamiento de fuuerza durante su etapa de volumen y despues volver otro peridod a un nivel de culturismo, con eso se obtienen optimos resultados.

[TheRekiem]

>>> tienen un poco pinta de gorditos y todo

La mayoría sí tienen el aspecto de "barrilete" porque buscan la fuerza a cualquier precio (incluso si hace falta ganar mucha grasa para ello), pero también hay powerlifters y strongmen que tienen una planta envidiable, sobre todo en Europa: Mariusz Pudzianowski, Magnus Samuelsson, Jesse Marunde, Svend Karlsen... además, salvo que compitas, no creo que nadie que siga una rutina de fuerza vaya a ponerse gordo ni nada.

Yo sigo pensando que si se busca la simetría y la estética, como ha comentado Hiperius, será más recomendable buscar una rutina que preste atención a cincelar los músculos de forma individual, mientras que si se busca tener una sentadilla impresionante, un mejor rendimiento atlético/marcial o voltear una rueda de tractor, ir a una rutina de fuerza. Aunque en ambos casos, meter algunos ejercicios "del otro lado" nunca está de más.

[Týr]

Aunque siempre puedan existir puntos en común, es obvio que el entrenamiento de un atleta de fuerza y de un culturista han de ser diferentes dado que persiguen objetivos distintos.

Yo hace ya mucho tiempo que no pienso en términos de "entrenar un músculo" sino de "ejecutar un movimiento", procurando que implique al mayor numero de articulaciones posible. Pero, claro, la motivación estética no me importa en absoluto (aunque a nadie le amarga tener un cuerpo fibrado y bonito), sino el desarrollo de ciertas capacidades físicas extrapolables a las artes marciales y deportes de contacto.