I'm confused~!~ Bodybuilder physique vs. powerlifter physique

Hey guys. I was watching the strongman contests not too long ago. And i see some of these guys lifting 800, 900, 1000LBS! But when i look at their bodies...their calves, quads, shoulders and arms don't really look that big. I understand that it benefits them to have more fat on their bodies but i dont see real big freaky mass hiding underneath that fat. This one guy was lifting 900lbs and besides the fat he was carrying it looked like he had a 'decent' amount of muscle. Nothing crazy. My question is....these are are soo soo strong...but how come on some of them i can't see the crazy muscle mass on their bodies??? Can someone explain this to me. It would help me out alot on choosing the right workouts for a bodybuilder physique. Thanks.

cuz they train for strength for their main priority while bodybuilders train for size and hypertrophy


size does not equal strength most americans tend to think that

it is weird though... i know many powerlifters in the 165lb and 181 lb weight class that are stronger than the top bodybuilders who look like he-man while the skinny little 165er is deadlifting well into 600lbs

Genetics plays a big role as well.

yea and the way your built....short arms=usually a strong bencher
long arms, short torso= good deadlifter

Mostly the way tendons/ligaments are connected and length of muscle bellies.

I'm a fairly strong BB'er but I know others who outweigh me in muscle mass whom lift less than myself.. Everyone is different and your training has a bit to do with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by I**mfkr

Mostly the way tendons/ligaments are connected and length of muscle bellies.

I'm a fairly strong BB'er but I know others who outweigh me in muscle mass whom lift less than myself.. Everyone is different and your training has a bit to do with it.

---

Ya I would definitely say a lot to do with it. I see powerlifters come into the gym sit on the bench, warm up a few seats up bench press than do maybe 1 or 2 sets of heavy 3 rep bench and leave for the day. I suppose in a way you could compare it to your HIT training (maybe why you are so strong also) but they only seem to work 1 muscle/exercise per day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squatman51

yea and the way your built....short arms=usually a strong bencher
long arms, short torso= good deadlifter

---

lol. i know a dude who is about 5'5. he weighs like 150. he puts up over 300 on the bench. his lockout is only about 3 inches above his chest. he's built like a little bulldog. strong as hell on the bench but you could push him around with one hand.:lol:

some guys just have more "neural" strenght. also. powerlifters who arent heavyweights also tend to use drugs that increase strength before size, like anavar, halotestin, etc.

but also muscles/tendon/ligament conections and overal body structure make some people more efficient at hoisting weight.
Mike Mentzer said it is foolish to draw a comparisin between 2 trainers, and that you should only compare you, to YOU.

However, Pavol Tsatsuline a russian strength coach wrote a whole book on this. He said there is a way to train for just strengh, not size. it utilizes the bench and deadlift, 3-5 times a week, short brief sessions not to failure, in the 5 rep range.
He says this method amps up the neural output of the muscle without causing the muscle to grow as much. he also says some bodybuilders train for sarcoplasmic hypertrophy(sarcoplasm being intramusculare fluid) with super high reps. This "flushing" or "muscle spinning" apparently builds capilaries and increases the amount of fluid the muscle can hold. I guess you could call this training for the "pump". According to Pavol, this is not functional muscle, just fluff.
Most guys including myself still get pumps however traing in the 6-8 rep range. So i believe most trainers do get a degree of this "sarcoplasmic growth". IMO, i dont think training soly for that purpose will ever yield you more and more muscle continuely. i think the size the "pump" factor can bring is very limited. i have heard of guys adding a 15-30 rep set at the end of each excersise in effort to get sarcoplasmic growth on top of thier actual growth. I would say this is the most you should do to get that extra "pump", but IMO not necessary. But adding a high rep set at the end of an excersise preceded by heavy, low rep sets is alot better than nothing but high rep sets, which will probably get you nowhere.
Mike Mentzer, one of the fathers of high intensity training said training to get a pump is worthless. He said trian for strength and you will get bigger. HIT guys usually advocate heavy, intense, brief and infrequent workouts, going to failure on excersises and often beyond failure.

however there are some systems out that that are high frequency, not to failure like "HST(Hypertrophy Specific Training) and many of Chad Waterbury's workouts.

So who knows what to belive? Right now i like HIT, and so does my brother but he is test driving the HST program currently. I think HIT is the safest bet for strethg and growth. most will agree.

IMHO there are 4 things responsible for growth.

1.CNS(CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM)/ neuromuscular system, stimulation or overload .
2.Increase in muscle cell size due to micro tears,(true hypertrophy)
3. hyperplasia(division of muscle cells), yes it happens. And is more seen in the chemically enhanced lifters than the nattural ones. Also stretching of the muslce may aid in this.
4. To a lesser degree, sarcoplasmic hypertrphy. fluid and blood vessel increase. mainly a product of high reps, carbloading, and also stretching as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by C_Bino

Ya I would definitely say a lot to do with it. I see powerlifters come into the gym sit on the bench, warm up a few seats up bench press than do maybe 1 or 2 sets of heavy 3 rep bench and leave for the day. I suppose in a way you could compare it to your HIT training (maybe why you are so strong also) but they only seem to work 1 muscle/exercise per day.

---

I wouldn't say the way I train has to do with my strength although I do believe in training for strengh.

I built my base on the run of the mill routines ppl do everyday in the gym 5-6days/wk etc but also hit my fair share of plateaus when I was nowhere near my potential which I attribute to a poor diet, overtraining, and lack of sleep. But I was always strong for my weight/size which I think has more to do with genetics than lifting styles or techniques.
That being said, since I've been training with HIT I have grown faster and bigger than I'd ever have thought possible with lower doses of drugs and much less time in the gym. Very interested to see where I'm at in the next 2-3years as long as I can avoid injury.

i would also like to add that powerlifters train mostly and live and die by the bench, squat, and dead. So some rarely do isolation stuff, but instead work compounds and work there muscles as a collective unit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Squatman51

cuz they train for strength for their main priority while bodybuilders train for size and hypertrophy


size does not equal strength most americans tend to think that

---

well said:aaGreen22