Things I believe but can't prove...

[quikky]

I think it’s partly genetic (height, bone structure, muscle insertions, etc) but not 95%. A lot of it is probably due to not training specifically for hypertrophy, especially for the muscles that make the most difference physique-wise (side delts, arms). And of course not being particularly lean, not being skilled at posing, and not having an instagram feed composed entirely of photos with perfect lighting and camera angles.

exactly this

getting to a 500lb squat or a 600lb will do almost nothing for many of the muscle groups that impact your aesthetics the most

Agree with this and some of the others posting along the same lines.

Hyper focus on SBD generally sucks for: arms, side delts, lats, parts of the back (depending on genetics), quads (also depending on genetics), calves, and often even hamstrings. You can have big SBD numbers with small arms, unimpressive back, mediocre quads, no calves, shoulders that don't pop, and often high body fat that you keep estimating to be 5% lower than it really is.

I really wish the bIG CoMpOUNds religion would die. Somehow if you don't focus on SBD, you fail the manhood test, or something. Nothing wrong with SBD if you love the lifts or train for powerlifting or adjacent sport. However, the nonsense of SBD building great physiques, or squats being the king of lifts, or deadlifts building your whole body has led far too many people astray. If you want to look like a bodybuilder, train like one. I don't know why so many people cannot reduce their obsession with SBD while being closeted physique lifters.

[KyleSchuant]

That's bodybuilding, and is fair enough. But if we think of health... the basic movements are some sort of squat - by "some sort" I mean anything where you flex and extend hips and knees, so lunges etc are included - a push, pull, hip hinge and loaded carry.

Traditional SS is just squat, push, slow hinge, and then squat, push, quick hinge - though the quick hinge is usually omitted. So of the 5 basic movements, you have 2 of them done twice, and 1 of them done once. Pulls and carries are entirely absent. It's a pretty anterior approach, for the most part.

Squat, bench, press and deadlift are the common combination. But what if you did all 5 movements? Squat, press, row one day, and deadlift and farmer's walks the other? Or if you were going to just do 3 - how about rows, farmer's walks and deadlifts? It's all a bit arbitrary, really.

[Hanley]

I believe and absolutely cannot prove: peak force is more important than load when it comes to the transfer of submaximal loads to top-end strength. I also think peak force is a really, really good proxy for total recruitment during the propulsive phase of a lift (and thus a proxy of a rep's "efficacy").

The equipment required to get a valid measure is fucking expensive, though.

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

[Hardartery]

I believe and absolutely cannot prove: peak force is more important than load when it comes to the transfer of submaximal loads to top-end strength. I also think peak force is a really, really good proxy for total recruitment during the propulsive phase of a lift (and thus a proxy of a rep's "efficacy").

The equipment required to get a valid measure if fucking expensive, though.

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

I'm with you on that one, I'd be interested in whatever metric you come up with.

[quikky]

I believe and absolutely cannot prove: peak force is more important than load when it comes to the transfer of submaximal loads to top-end strength. I also think peak force is a really, really good proxy for total recruitment during the propulsive phase of a lift (and thus a proxy of a rep's "efficacy").

The equipment required to get a valid measure if fucking expensive, though.

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

Aren't VBTs like RepOne and Vitruve capable of showing peak force? Or, are you referring to them as the expensive equipment?

[mgil]

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

It’s just calculus.

But yeah, NMU recruitment would seem to be the One True Goal of training. Cycling them as fast as possible as well.

[Hanley]

I believe and absolutely cannot prove: peak force is more important than load when it comes to the transfer of submaximal loads to top-end strength. I also think peak force is a really, really good proxy for total recruitment during the propulsive phase of a lift (and thus a proxy of a rep's "efficacy").

The equipment required to get a valid measure if fucking expensive, though.

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

Aren't VBTs like RepOne and Vitruve capable of showing peak force? Or, are you referring to them as the expensive equipment?

RepOne does not. I don’t know about the other sub-$1000 options. Not sure the sampling rate on the cheaper units is high enough for good data.

My Tendo unit is fucking fantastic…but it’s silly expensive.

[Hanley]

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

It’s just calculus.

But how do you program a session with that there calculus?

Like a super crude way of using it to program a session:

Is peak force of most reps with 10%* of e1rm?
If no>>>achieve session target volume using sets at RPE 7-9

If yes>>achieve session target volume however the fuck you want…no RPE needed; sets/reps are arbitrary.

Maybe that’s all it needs to be

* definitely pulled 10% from my ass. But that does seem like a subjective threshold to “pretty fucking heavy”

[TimK]

RepOne does not. I don’t know about the other sub-$1000 options. Not sure the sampling rate on the cheaper units is high enough for good data.

My Tendo unit is fucking fantastic…but it’s silly expensive.

I thought I saw recently (last few months) that RepOne had a new firmware update that measured force. Not 100% sure because mine broke and I can’t get it to charge…

[Hanley]

RepOne does not. I don’t know about the other sub-$1000 options. Not sure the sampling rate on the cheaper units is high enough for good data.

My Tendo unit is fucking fantastic…but it’s silly expensive.

I thought I saw recently (last few months) that RepOne had a new firmware update that measured force. Not 100% sure because mine broke and I can’t get it to charge…

I know it’s been in the works for years. I sold my RepOne after getting a runaround about timelines for the FW release.

[alek]

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

It’s just calculus.

But how do you program a session with that there calculus?

Ask Rippletits.

[Hanley]

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

It’s just calculus.

But how do you program a session with that there calculus?

Ask Rippletits.

lol.

[DCR]

I don't know why so many people cannot reduce their obsession with SBD while being closeted physique lifters.

Responding on my own behalf and I expect for some portion of such folks: because despite being closeted (or open) physique lifters, we know that we mostly don’t look like it (our own faults, of course) and so having halfway decent SBD numbers at least makes us feel like we’ve accomplished something in our hobby / we’re not pussies.

My towering insecurity and I will see ourselves out.

[ChasingCurls69]

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

It’s just calculus.

But yeah, NMU recruitment would seem to be the One True Goal of training. Cycling them as fast as possible as well.

Is velocity the integral of force? All I remember from Calculus is that acceleration is the integral of velocity.

[cgeorg]

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

It’s just calculus.

But yeah, NMU recruitment would seem to be the One True Goal of training. Cycling them as fast as possible as well.

Is velocity the integral of force? All I remember from Calculus is that acceleration is the integral of velocity.

F = ma, so velocity would be closer to a derivative of force, not an integral. My brain tells me that since m would be constant, it would basically be dropped when you take the derivative but it's been a long time.

ETA: Got my integrals and derivatives backwards, like I said, long time

[alek]

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

It’s just calculus.

But yeah, NMU recruitment would seem to be the One True Goal of training. Cycling them as fast as possible as well.

Is velocity the integral of force? All I remember from Calculus is that acceleration is the integral of velocity.

Jerk is the derivative of Acceleration, which is the derivative of Velocity, which is the derivative of Position.

Position is the integral of Velocity, which is the integral of Acceleration, which is the integral of Jerk.

Derivatives and Integrals are "essentially" inverses of one another; for turbo-nerding-out, see the Mean Value Theorem for Integrals and the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

ETA:

Where's @Savs or @PatrickDB when you need them?

ETA again...

But yes, in general you can say that velocity is the integral of force since force is defined by acceleration. ...Hand waving ensues...

Yeah don't pay any attention to this. Ask someone that actually knows.

[TimK]

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

It’s just calculus.

But yeah, NMU recruitment would seem to be the One True Goal of training. Cycling them as fast as possible as well.

Is velocity the integral of force? All I remember from Calculus is that acceleration is the integral of velocity.

Jerk is the derivative of Acceleration, which is the derivative of Velocity, which is the derivative of Position.

Position is the integral of Velocity, which is the integral of Acceleration, which is the integral of Jerk.

Derivatives and Integrals are "essentially" inverses of one another; for turbo-nerding-out, see the Mean Value Theorem for Integrals and the Fundamental Theorem of Calculus.

ETA:

Where's @Savs or @PatrickDB when you need them?

ETA again...

But yes, in general you can say that velocity is the integral of force since force is defined by acceleration. ...Hand waving ensues...

The Acceleration Store called, they’re running out of the integral of YOU!

[convergentsum]

I also need to figure out how to program using it as a prescriptive metric.

It’s just calculus.

But yeah, NMU recruitment would seem to be the One True Goal of training. Cycling them as fast as possible as well.

Is velocity the integral of force? All I remember from Calculus is that acceleration is the integral of velocity.

Other way round, velocity is the integral of acceleration. Easy sanity check: ask yourself "if my acceleration is zero, might I still have non-zero velocity?" Since we can intuitively answer yes, that immediately tells us the velocity cannot be a derivative of acceleration.

Jerk is the derivative of Acceleration, which is the derivative of Velocity, which is the derivative of Position.

Position is the integral of Velocity, which is the integral of Acceleration, which is the integral of Jerk.

You can continue taking time-derivatives and apparently these quantities are called "snap," "crackle" and "pop," like rice crispies. I assumed these were just a bit of a joke, but I see that "snap" (derivative of jerk) does have practical value in laying out railway tracks.

But yes, in general you can say that velocity is the integral of force since force is defined by acceleration. ...Hand waving ensues...

The proper definition of force is the time-derivative of momentum [math]F = \frac{\textrm{d}}{\textrm{d}t}(mv)[/math], so it is absolutely correct to say that the integral of force over time is momentum (plus or minus a constant). If the object's mass is not changing, then you can just divide by [math]m[/math] to obtain [math]v[/math].

[alek]

Jerk is the derivative of Acceleration, which is the derivative of Velocity, which is the derivative of Position.

Position is the integral of Velocity, which is the integral of Acceleration, which is the integral of Jerk.

You can continue taking time-derivatives and apparently these quantities are called "snap," "crackle" and "pop," like rice crispies. I assumed these were just a bit of a joke, but I see that "snap" (derivative of jerk) does have practical value in laying out railway tracks.

Cool. I knew that there were more derivatives that had names and such, but I never bothered to learn them. I had been taught that entities like militaries, space agencies, and such make those calculations in order to better track their objects/projectiles in motion.

That thing about railroad tracks sounds an awful lot like curvature.

But yes, in general you can say that velocity is the integral of force since force is defined by acceleration. ...Hand waving ensues...

The proper definition of force is the time-derivative of momentum [math]F = \frac{\textrm{d}}{\textrm{d}t}(mv)[/math], so it is absolutely correct to say that the integral of force over time is momentum (plus or minus a constant). If the object's mass is not changing, then you can just divide by [math]m[/math] to obtain [math]v[/math].

Yeah, I'm not exactly sure about anything related to force/physics. It's been too long, and my brain spilled it right out after it was no longer necessary.

[KarlM]

I really wish the bIG CoMpOUNds religion would die. Somehow if you don't focus on SBD, you fail the manhood test, or something. Nothing wrong with SBD if you love the lifts or train for powerlifting or adjacent sport. However, the nonsense of SBD building great physiques, or squats being the king of lifts, or deadlifts building your whole body has led far too many people astray. If you want to look like a bodybuilder, train like one. I don't know why so many people cannot reduce their obsession with SBD while being closeted physique lifters.

I generally agree with this, but I don't think I do when you're just starting out. In my case, I had been lifting for several years doing p90x stuff, which has a lot of body building stuff in it, and had made gains. When I switched to the big compound lifts (when I found SS), I made new gains in size for maybe about a year, then that stopped. Traps got bigger, pecs and triceps started growing. Forearms for some reason grew. Ass grew. Not anything outrageous, but it was noticeable (I got comments from friends and family, and my wife was rather impressed as well!). About a year ago when I did several months of pull/push/legs with a bodybuilding emphasis (with the big three still in my rotation, but reduced volume) I made some more gains.

Maybe I should just say big compound lifts are important, but more important the earlier you are in your lifting journey.