Low % High Volume

[DanCR]

As for your question regarding how this could inform training... What would you want to make of it? The only practical takeaway from this would be to train your delts 8hrs 6 days a week to get strong delts in a 10-20 year timeframe.

I don’t think that’s necessarily true. It may be a case for more volume - particularly for forearms and calves - but not that much. For example, this line of thinking may justify calves 6-7 days a week, as many bodybuilders do.

One thing I take away from it is that working all day does not give thoses guys large muscles, just strong. Granted, they are probably larger muscles than if they did not do this work, but it does not result in a great deal of hypertrophy for them which implies that it is exactly the wrong thing to do for a BBer.

I think that’s generally true but perhaps not with these specific bodyparts - hence why one can build one’s calves with a jump rope.

[SnakePlissken]

Trying to start a conversation, no particularly strong opinion on this coming in just thinkng onit.
I have run across a couple of videos recently with people referencing Brick Layers in particular. The basic argument being that guys doing that sort of labour are strong even though the may not do any lifting. I am a Mason by trade and even ran my own masonry contracting business for a while (I still get several bid requests a week), so this of course stuck in my mind. I don't know that it did or did not give me any particular leg up on strength training, but I did work in the trade from a very young age. My father never lifted weights in his life, but was incredibly good at armwrestling and could do shoulder raises and holds that nobody in the gym was capable of - he would sometimes pick up my DB's and play with them when I was lifting and what I struggled with and trained with was toy weight for him on those movements. I have also seen a couple of recent posts in here on training indicating that some guys are much happier shifting their upper body (Or maybe lower as well) training to higher reps and lower weight.
Getting to the point now, where is the balance? I know that, for example, the mark of a qualified Bricklayer (The union minimum productivity level to gain membership) is 1000 bricks a day. I have seen really good layers lay as many as 2500 bricks in a day. 250 blocks is the standard, and I have seen as many as 500 by one guy in a day. My best was 440 blocks. That is a lot of reps, and add to that it's at least 5 days a week, sometimes 6 or even 7 depending on the job and the deadline. No way is anyone discussing those kind of reps on here, but they are also at a higher % 1RM. What do you guys think?

I did masonry in trade school and worked a few summers and some part time side jobs with my teacher. We were definitely the strongest people in our trade school. I've actually recently been thinking about the exact same thing of someone doing a massive amount of volume at relatively low weight making some huge progress. I maxed out the grip machine at a fair pretty easily and I weighed about 185 at the time, but you could call my training this when I was doing laborer work...

Brick tong carries (farmers walks)
2 hands, 14 bricks each, about 70 lbs a hand, 140 total
by like 40-50 sets per day
Total volume is roughly 6,300 lbs x whatever distance you trucked this, likely up a hill.

Block work and going slow over the day
About 500 block (roughly 55lb per, or about 40 if your contractor got the light CMUs) x 500 times you pick it up to butter the end, another x500 to lay it. Total volume is roughly 55k lbs

Other volume builders
Shaking down your trowel with mortar
Buttering brick/block
Mixing mortar with a hoe
Carrying 70lb bags of cement, lime and sand

Anecdotally, several people I knew on job sites could pick up 6 block (3 in each hand by stacking them) without much of an issue.
Another guy I knew weighed like maybe 160 and could bend a 16 penny nail with his thumb.

[Hardartery]

Trying to start a conversation, no particularly strong opinion on this coming in just thinkng onit.
I have run across a couple of videos recently with people referencing Brick Layers in particular. The basic argument being that guys doing that sort of labour are strong even though the may not do any lifting. I am a Mason by trade and even ran my own masonry contracting business for a while (I still get several bid requests a week), so this of course stuck in my mind. I don't know that it did or did not give me any particular leg up on strength training, but I did work in the trade from a very young age. My father never lifted weights in his life, but was incredibly good at armwrestling and could do shoulder raises and holds that nobody in the gym was capable of - he would sometimes pick up my DB's and play with them when I was lifting and what I struggled with and trained with was toy weight for him on those movements. I have also seen a couple of recent posts in here on training indicating that some guys are much happier shifting their upper body (Or maybe lower as well) training to higher reps and lower weight.
Getting to the point now, where is the balance? I know that, for example, the mark of a qualified Bricklayer (The union minimum productivity level to gain membership) is 1000 bricks a day. I have seen really good layers lay as many as 2500 bricks in a day. 250 blocks is the standard, and I have seen as many as 500 by one guy in a day. My best was 440 blocks. That is a lot of reps, and add to that it's at least 5 days a week, sometimes 6 or even 7 depending on the job and the deadline. No way is anyone discussing those kind of reps on here, but they are also at a higher % 1RM. What do you guys think?

I did masonry in trade school and worked a few summers and some part time side jobs with my teacher. We were definitely the strongest people in our trade school. I've actually recently been thinking about the exact same thing of someone doing a massive amount of volume at relatively low weight making some huge progress. I maxed out the grip machine at a fair pretty easily and I weighed about 185 at the time, but you could call my training this when I was doing laborer work...

Brick tong carries (farmers walks)
2 hands, 14 bricks each, about 70 lbs a hand, 140 total
by like 40-50 sets per day
Total volume is roughly 6,300 lbs x whatever distance you trucked this, likely up a hill.

Block work and going slow over the day
About 500 block (roughly 55lb per, or about 40 if your contractor got the light CMUs) x 500 times you pick it up to butter the end, another x500 to lay it. Total volume is roughly 55k lbs

Other volume builders
Shaking down your trowel with mortar
Buttering brick/block
Mixing mortar with a hoe
Carrying 70lb bags of cement, lime and sand

Anecdotally, several people I knew on job sites could pick up 6 block (3 in each hand by stacking them) without much of an issue.
Another guy I knew weighed like maybe 160 and could bend a 16 penny nail with his thumb.

It was just what I did from an early age, so hard to say what effect it had with no real controlfor comparison. I know I could carry two blocks in each hand pinched, any size even the 12", and I carried two bags at a time if I was moving them - because I'm lazy at heart and would rather carry twice as much once than make two trips. I don't know, but I'm thinking really massive volume does something that isn't in the literature.

[SnakePlissken]

I don't know, but I'm thinking really massive volume does something that isn't in the literature.

I'm 100% convinced as well. Especially after experimenting with 45 bench reps over 2 weeks lol.

[MarkKO]

I don't know, but I'm thinking really massive volume does something that isn't in the literature.

I'm 100% convinced as well. Especially after experimenting with 45 bench reps over 2 weeks lol.

When you think about this, it makes sense.

The literature by its nature is based on studies. Studies require participants which also means time. The kind of volume we're talking about here and the 'training' takes literal days to do. It's going to be very difficult to set up a controlled study with those kind of parameters.

Another thing just occurred to me.

I had a relatively brief foray into kettlebell sport around the time I started training. To my knowledge, it is the only training modality that comes even close to what @hardartery is talking about. An average session for me (and I trained five to seven days a week) included things like five to 10 minute sets of snatches or jerks from the rack position. Super light weight (35 to 55 lbs kettlebells mostly) but at a pace of anything from 10 to 25 reps per minute. So you would commonly do sets of 100 to 200 reps; and in one session multiple sets like that. It wouldn't be uncommon to have a total weight lifted over the session of something like 25000 lbs, and this is nowhere close to the professional guys who would be using generally 55 to 80 lbs kettlebells for similar or higher reps.

The thing is, these guys aren't big. Even the heavyweights aren't big by PL or SM standards. But across the board these guys can handle a lot more weight than their size would suggest. I remember seeing one their top SHWs pull a pretty easy 600 lbs, for instance; and this is a guy who wouldn't ever deadlift (you could tell, his technique was horrific). Or there was one of their lighter guys who at around 165 lbs or so would happily hold a 90 odd pound kettlebell over his head.

So I would absolutely agree that there's something the literature is missing, although there may well be that missing piece in what used to be the eastern bloc literature.

[SnakePlissken]

I don't know, but I'm thinking really massive volume does something that isn't in the literature.

I'm 100% convinced as well. Especially after experimenting with 45 bench reps over 2 weeks lol.

When you think about this, it makes sense.

The literature by its nature is based on studies. Studies require participants which also means time. The kind of volume we're talking about here and the 'training' takes literal days to do. It's going to be very difficult to set up a controlled study with those kind of parameters.

Another thing just occurred to me.

I had a relatively brief foray into kettlebell sport around the time I started training. To my knowledge, it is the only training modality that comes even close to what @hardartery is talking about. An average session for me (and I trained five to seven days a week) included things like five to 10 minute sets of snatches or jerks from the rack position. Super light weight (35 to 55 lbs kettlebells mostly) but at a pace of anything from 10 to 25 reps per minute. So you would commonly do sets of 100 to 200 reps; and in one session multiple sets like that. It wouldn't be uncommon to have a total weight lifted over the session of something like 25000 lbs, and this is nowhere close to the professional guys who would be using generally 55 to 80 lbs kettlebells for similar or higher reps.

The thing is, these guys aren't big. Even the heavyweights aren't big by PL or SM standards. But across the board these guys can handle a lot more weight than their size would suggest. I remember seeing one their top SHWs pull a pretty easy 600 lbs, for instance; and this is a guy who wouldn't ever deadlift (you could tell, his technique was horrific). Or there was one of their lighter guys who at around 165 lbs or so would happily hold a 90 odd pound kettlebell over his head.

So I would absolutely agree that there's something the literature is missing, although there may well be that missing piece in what used to be the eastern bloc literature.

There's no real way to capture something like that in studies. Two people could have the same genetics, but one of them grows up on a farm and another one doesn't, so one of them becomes strong enough that the first time he deadlifts he works up to 4 or 500 pounds (Nuckols has mentioned this, and he did a ton of tree work as a kid) and the other kid works up to maybe mid 200s. Neither has deadlifted before, but general physical activity forces us to react and tolerate the work. Honestly the average person's physical output about 150 years ago was probably that of an average construction worker today.

[aurelius]

I had someone make this statement to me once (paraphrasing): We work at high intensities for short periods of time to try and replicate the impact of manual labor for 8-10 hours a day. Our ancestors would have been able to squat and deadlift 1.5-2 times their weight as a result of just living without the comforts of the modern age.

[lehman906]

I had someone make this statement to me once (paraphrasing): We work at high intensities for short periods of time to try and replicate the impact of manual labor for 8-10 hours a day. Our ancestors would have been able to squat and deadlift 1.5-2 times their weight as a result of just living without the comforts of the modern age.

I think this is bang on for the deadlift, but probably not the squat. Not right away, anyway. Squat and bench are too different to anything one has to do consistently in any manual labor to have the same skill and strength transfers, so I think people from those bygone eras could just walk up to a bar and pull it, but would have to practice other big lifts. Yes, I'm being pedantic and biased because of my hate/hate relationship with squats.

As far as the conversation of manual labor/farmboys being able to just be stronger right off the bat, it might be largely due to heavy weights not being scary for them. Take two people of roughly the same size and body composition, but if one has hauled heavy tools, trees, etc, they are fully accustomed to the feeling of a heavy load in their hands, and it won't trigger the same kind of instinctive panic, fear of injury, or even just feelings of "I can't do this" that it might in the unprepared person. Just spitballing here, but as a fellow country bumpkin, I too have witnessed many a strong AF corn-fed farmboy or wiry old farmer holding a car engine for 15 minutes while their buddy unscrews something*, so I agree that there is definitely something there.

*his name was Bud Armstrong, which, honestly, is a little too on-the-nose.

[Renascent]

*his name was Bud Armstrong, which, honestly, is a little too on-the-nose.

That's a beautiful name.

[Hardartery]

I had someone make this statement to me once (paraphrasing): We work at high intensities for short periods of time to try and replicate the impact of manual labor for 8-10 hours a day. Our ancestors would have been able to squat and deadlift 1.5-2 times their weight as a result of just living without the comforts of the modern age.

I think this is bang on for the deadlift, but probably not the squat. Not right away, anyway. Squat and bench are too different to anything one has to do consistently in any manual labor to have the same skill and strength transfers, so I think people from those bygone eras could just walk up to a bar and pull it, but would have to practice other big lifts. Yes, I'm being pedantic and biased because of my hate/hate relationship with squats.

As far as the conversation of manual labor/farmboys being able to just be stronger right off the bat, it might be largely due to heavy weights not being scary for them. Take two people of roughly the same size and body composition, but if one has hauled heavy tools, trees, etc, they are fully accustomed to the feeling of a heavy load in their hands, and it won't trigger the same kind of instinctive panic, fear of injury, or even just feelings of "I can't do this" that it might in the unprepared person. Just spitballing here, but as a fellow country bumpkin, I too have witnessed many a strong AF corn-fed farmboy or wiry old farmer holding a car engine for 15 minutes while their buddy unscrews something*, so I agree that there is definitely something there.

*his name was Bud Armstrong, which, honestly, is a little too on-the-nose.

Please tell me his nickname was "Stretch".

[lehman906]

I had someone make this statement to me once (paraphrasing): We work at high intensities for short periods of time to try and replicate the impact of manual labor for 8-10 hours a day. Our ancestors would have been able to squat and deadlift 1.5-2 times their weight as a result of just living without the comforts of the modern age.

I think this is bang on for the deadlift, but probably not the squat. Not right away, anyway. Squat and bench are too different to anything one has to do consistently in any manual labor to have the same skill and strength transfers, so I think people from those bygone eras could just walk up to a bar and pull it, but would have to practice other big lifts. Yes, I'm being pedantic and biased because of my hate/hate relationship with squats.

As far as the conversation of manual labor/farmboys being able to just be stronger right off the bat, it might be largely due to heavy weights not being scary for them. Take two people of roughly the same size and body composition, but if one has hauled heavy tools, trees, etc, they are fully accustomed to the feeling of a heavy load in their hands, and it won't trigger the same kind of instinctive panic, fear of injury, or even just feelings of "I can't do this" that it might in the unprepared person. Just spitballing here, but as a fellow country bumpkin, I too have witnessed many a strong AF corn-fed farmboy or wiry old farmer holding a car engine for 15 minutes while their buddy unscrews something*, so I agree that there is definitely something there.

*his name was Bud Armstrong, which, honestly, is a little too on-the-nose.

Please tell me his nickname was "Stretch".

He was probably 50 when Stretch hit the market, and always struck me as having that “child of the depression” stern stoicism. At least that’s how it seemed to me, but he was mostly an often discussed but rarely seen figure at the end of our dirt road.

[Renascent]

...he was mostly an often discussed but rarely seen figure at the end of our dirt road.

Life goals, and I'm not even trying to be funny.

Please don't come visit or look for me at the market. If you need a human hydraulic lift, send for me by smoke signal or send a raven.

I had a silent chuckle this weekend when I helped a handyman move some drywall sheets. Whereas I was spent from "muh training" and taking so much care to brace before lifting (because of muh deadlifts), this wiry old timer was slinging and hauling shit like it's second nature to him (because it actually is).

[Brackish]

...he was mostly an often discussed but rarely seen figure at the end of our dirt road.

Life goals, and I'm not even trying to be funny.

Please don't come visit or look for me at the market. If you need a human hydraulic lift, send for me by smoke signal or send a raven.

I had a silent chuckle this weekend when I helped a handyman move some drywall sheets. Whereas I was spent from "muh training" and taking so much care to brace before lifting (because of muh deadlifts), this wiry old timer was slinging and hauling shit like it's second nature to him (because it actually is).

I was thinking about this the other weekend when my FIL had me help him move a safe. I was more worried about damaging the walls and wooden floors than what my back/core was doing. And you know what, when the load was heavy enough, I braced automatically. Toying with the idea of doing the same thing when I lift. Just lift it. If it's heavy enough, my body will brace on its own. I feel like the whole bracing/getting locked in, whatever, takes more out of me than the actual lifting, especially when the reps per set get past 4.

[MarkKO]

...he was mostly an often discussed but rarely seen figure at the end of our dirt road.

Life goals, and I'm not even trying to be funny.

Please don't come visit or look for me at the market. If you need a human hydraulic lift, send for me by smoke signal or send a raven.

I had a silent chuckle this weekend when I helped a handyman move some drywall sheets. Whereas I was spent from "muh training" and taking so much care to brace before lifting (because of muh deadlifts), this wiry old timer was slinging and hauling shit like it's second nature to him (because it actually is).

I was thinking about this the other weekend when my FIL had me help him move a safe. I was more worried about damaging the walls and wooden floors than what my back/core was doing. And you know what, when the load was heavy enough, I braced automatically. Toying with the idea of doing the same thing when I lift. Just lift it. If it's heavy enough, my body will brace on its own. I feel like the whole bracing/getting locked in, whatever, takes more out of me than the actual lifting, especially when the reps per set get past 4.

I would highly recommend against doing this. The risk of something going badly wrong far outweighs the potential reward.

There is a reason the vast majority of competent coaches in strength sports teach techniques to maintain pelvic and lower back stability.

If you find bracing to be tiring, work harder on it. That will most likely solve the problem.