Is Powerbuilding Overrated? And more importantly if you want to get stronger while also getting bigger, what is the best approach? We answer this in today's video. Bonus: If you want proof fitness content works in cycles...this was filmed in early October, weeks before Natural Hypertrophy dropped his video (and the numerous response videos). And yet everything said here? Perfectly applicable to the current conversation. We're living in a simulation.
Genuinely, this dialectics-style discussion video has been the most rewarding to watch on the given topic. It felt like an intuitive inquiry via question by the 3 of you with open-mindedness of course. And the fact that this was filmed before really boggles one's mind - that the best take on the issue was pre-shot :). Thank you for this.
Also just reminded now of the old video by wise GREG NUCKOLS on this very channel on similiar topic FROM 2015 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-MeFXMX9Al8w.html&ab_channel=OmarIsuf .. ( I guess another ode to fitness content cycle gods :) ) .. that said the video STILL holds lot of SUBSTANCE and might help provide general framework what we now call "POWERBUILDING'.. i might not have understood entirely then but on rewatching i know its value now ..
@MarcoFeldman to me Powerbuilding just sounds like classical weight lifting. Anyhow if it gets me much of the way there in both areas before having to specialize then what is there not to love? Only Natural Hypertrophy seems to think that we think it means we'll be excellent in both, we already know that we're jack of trades.
Jeff's sweatshirt reading Sacramento backwards is an abomination. This was a good discussion. I liked the loose format. Dr Pak made a good point about specificity to powerlifting - singles vs 3’s & 5’s. Maybe we should rebrand to StrengthBuilding. It seems like a lot of the issues with powerbuilding stem from real world application (which still matters). i.e. putting more effort into SBD than other compounds and isolations, skipping or half-assing anything that isn’t SBD, sliding too far towards the powerlifting side of powerbuilding, etc. I think we are all more enlightened after The Great PowerBuilding Debate of 2023.
So what you're hinting at is that during your strength era you would ostensibly incorporate bodybuilding but only as a form of lip service. You didn't _get_ bodybuilding and so did a misapplied Frankenstein caricature with one side being the only actual side. Instead of adding meatballs to your pasta, you decided you would get protein from adding _yogurt_ to your pasta. Now that is an ABOMINATION. Maybe the real takeaway is that you need to be familiar with both, have experience with both, and then you will be apt enough to create a powerbuilding paradigm that isn't a sick joke. So now the debate shifts from innate limitations to human competency.
I think everyone is still having trouble defining powerbuilding. Steve Shaw popularized the term during his magazine days without a true relation to powerlifting. This was before the rise of raw powerlifting, so I think the confusion was less back then. He used it to mean general strength training with an emphasis on hypertrophy, and by that getting strong at a variety of movements and not just SBD. The problem is that everyone started calling themselves powerbuilders when they were just powerlifters who did some hypertrophy work on the side, and they didn't really care about increasing their strength on OHP, bent rows, pullups, etc if it wasn't driving their SBD numbers. I look at Bald Omni Man and Alex Leonidas of more appropriate examples of what powerbuilding originally meant. General strength work without a focus on competition doesn't need to include highly specific, low rep work unless it's done for fun. Powerbuilders are usually not competitive, so that's why I think it's best to view things as a grid rather than a spectrum. The 4 points of the grid could be "competitive strength", "recreational strength", "competitive size", "recreational size" or something similar. The truest powerbuilder is someone who wants size and strength without plans to compete, and you can fall into any quadrant or even in the middle. Who honestly cares? Lol.
Did a powerlifting program, strength went up. Did a hypertrophy program, muscles got big. Did a powerbuilding program, strength and size went up, but not as much as per specific program. I enjoy powerbuilding most of all.
@Dr__Pak It was indeed a beautiful take. Forces one to take a pause and think. Also, this might not feel unique to you( being an expert in the area of minimum effective dose) but it was indeed a unique perspective listening to -- therefore I think this does merit a separate video on your channel. This could include your anecdotes and observations ( as Dr ERIC HELMS calls/called it A . Ooo :) ) doing 'powerbuilding' combined with your expertise on minimum effective dosing to get stronger with some examples. Sorry, just my humble 2 cents. Thank you.
TLDR: Instead of doing 5*5 with strenght specific movements (Squat, deadlift, BB bench), do 2*2 of strength specific movements followed by 3*12 of high stimulus to fatigue bodybuiling style movements (leg curls, cable fly, skull crusher etc) .
From a time efficiency perspective, I would argue: If you already have set up your Squat, Bench, Deadlift for your 2x2 or whatever, you might as well do a few more sets. Just do them more BB training style. I mean, they are still solid movements for hypertrophy. Just lower the weight significantly and do like 3 sets of 10-12 with a really slow eccentric and maybe a pause in the stretch position. After that you can go do your leg extensions, cable fly, etc. Maybe with Deadlifts, just switch to Romanian Deadlifts.
Powerbuilding implies a hybrid between powerlifting & Bodybuilding, not Strength Training + Bodybuilding. I think with how Powerlift centric the general gym culture is, newer folks end up adopting others goals (big bench/squat/deadlift) instead of finding their own strength focused goals that they care about (big weighted pull up/dip/OHP/Front squat) that may bring them more satisfaction with their time in the gym. Basement Bodybuilding's journey is a good example of how one can easily get caught up in others goals
This reminds me of what Greg Nuckels said years ago. Take any decent hypertrophy program. Add a few top singles. Now it’s a good program for strength and hypertrophy.
I think one of the more persisting issues in this recent debate that has led to misunderstandings has been the theory behind the practise versus how most people really incorporate their understanding of 'powerbuilding' or whatever their goals may be in training. I don't think either 'side' really debates that you can train for whatever goal you may have, you don't have to restrict yourself to these labels of bodybuilder, powerlifter, strength, hypertrophy, or whatever else. There are certainly differences in how people interpret the science as justifying optimal training methods for hypertrophy and where strength fits into that, but the biggest concern seems to be for those that really do have their goal as hypertrophy, that they are led to believe that the methods of powerlifting or strength training apply even when hypertrophy only requires that strength be used as a means to an end, not an end in itself. It's also about contextualizing scientific findings, ultimately sample size=1 when it comes to one's practise and requires years of experience to find what combination of factors is holding you back or produces the best results for you, dogmatism on any side limits much of the spirit and reason for having individualized goals. The big three have no special status in a hypertrophy context, they are compound lifts just like their variations and many non-similar exercises. As long as people can be honest with their goals, I think much of the emotion and offence that people take in this debate because they are attached to labels fades away.
As someone who doesn't want to compete in powerlifting and bodybuilding, powerbuilding is perfect for me. I get satisfaction from seeing my lifts go up, at the same time, I also want to look good, but I'm also not the one who takes topless selfies for myself or social media. It's for a casual lifter like me who is serious enough to get strong, at the same time not worried about looking good with my clothes on
Some of older BaldOmnimans programs (skull knight or branded program) were literally what most of us would call powerbuilding program, you would choose to specialise in 2 of 4 main lifts, do lighter rpe work with them and accesories (until you get to heayy singles/triples), and then follow with bunch of bodybuilding exercises. I always had best progress in both strength and muscle with simmilar, modified type of training.
I follow a recommendation by Greg Nuckols: Most people primarily looking to get jacked can just do a heavy single or triple as top set and then move on to their bb work. I do a heavy 90-95% single for SBD and then do my down sets in the 5-10+ range afterwards. What I have noticed is that in my case the post activation potentiation of the heavy top set outweighs any negative fatigue effect from that top set to the point where I am often stronger on my 2nd set than if I were to start my bb work fresh.
I used to do that, switched to pure BB recently and size-wise wise I got much better results (I guess that I was in need of more volume). Obviously, I lost strength (although most of that might be related to decreased bw). I would suggest you to give it a go if you never did, if you ever decide to change things up.
"The man who chases 2 horizons catches neither" has always been the big argument I hear. And I think it's fair to say that yes, any form of powerbuilding is going to be less efficient than pure hypertrophy for size or pure powerlifting for strength. But I still run once or twice a week for 5-10ks, because cardio is important to me, now I can't get as fit as I could if I didn't go to the gym, but does that mean I should do 0 cardio? If a powerlifter wants to add some hypertrophy accessories so he doesn't become a roblox man with stick arms, power to him. If a bodybuilder wants to start their sessions with some heavier, further from failure work on compounds, power to them. Oh, and you guys forgot to mention the biggest beneficiaries of powerbuilding... People on gear!
You can walk and will do same effect longevity wise. Anyway 5-10kms run should not interfere that much with hypertrophy correctly programed in most of the cases (in my case It does and it sucks)
@@pablov1323 A walk that burns the 450-1000 calories my runs would is a LOOOOOOOONG walk. Plus long periods of heart rate elevation is good for the heart and lungs and all that jazz.
@@judgejudyandexecutioner.5223 yes agree... there are trade offs with both options. I can squeeze time here and there to make my 5km of fast walking daily most of the days but some people might not. And it is completely valid that some more heart rate elevation would come in handy... however in my case two leg days weekly interfere too much with any running
this and Bald Omni Man’s takes were the most nuanced on the topic. This whole debate has kinda ruffled some feathers all around and I think it lead to a worse discussion than it needed to. Powerbuilding is a variation of powerlifting work, since bodybuilding does not require the strength work to function but powerlifting does need hypertrophy work to function. Powerbuilding is just the turning up of the dial of hypertrophy at some expense of the power
NH is too dogmatic in his pure bb approach. Usually BOM and Alex are way more nuanced because they are way more complete athletes. I also think their physiques are massively better than NH's.
@@ShvabicuThat’s not really the point. NH’s logic is that they’d have even more muscle if they always were purely hypertrophy. Alex has always trained for size and strength the only difference with his current approach is 1 he isn’t doing the max effort method bc there’s no point he isn’t worried about peaking his strength. And 2 he increased isolation volume. I just pulled up one of his upper workouts during the 405 bench grind it’s titled serious gains upper body workout. He does a tricep pushdown, JM press, and curl in addition to his pressing and pulling. Another one very intense upper body workout he did curls and some band work. High intensity upper body workout he does curls and face pulls. Many have a slight misconception about this he has always preached against minimalism. And he only recently dropped the max effort method bc he decided he’s fine with current strength achievements
@@ShvabicuAlex said himself he wasted a lot of time powerlifting thinking he was bodybuilding, the guys also 3ft1, so he just generally looks better anyways, not taking away from the guy, but he is not tall. Omni man stays relatively lean year round, but I would agree that if he did strictly hypertrophy, he would likely look better than what he does now, he just enjoys general strength and there's nothing wrong with that.
I did powerbuilding actually Jeff’s and Omar programs. As it was sold as you get everything, I truly would have appreciate back in that time, more transparency. I developed a “spider physique” which I highly regret, currently working in correcting the imbalances produced by the muscles I neglected. My take: people should learn how to program on their own, and influencers should be more transparent at selling their products. Also the definition of “accessories” makes the rest secondary. I learned that the neglected parts are as important as the “main” ones. Without being redundant, powerlifting attempts to give the best of both, but it’s not really possible. In bodybuilding there’s not such a thing as accessory work. While in powerlifting everything goes around the big 3. Attempting both, and claiming to be able to achieve both goals is nothing but disingenuous, tho if you’re into strength and aside would like to bodybuild there’s an option. But imo powerbuilding as it should, fails at accomplishing both at the same time.
OG powerbuilding isn't just the Big 3, this is a relatively recent change with the rise in popularity of powerlifting. Powerbuilding is about getting strong at many movements and is much more diverse than the recent discussion has led many to believe. The problem is the programs you followed and the shifting definition, not the concept as a whole.
@@DCJayhawk57 dude, the concept is flawed. Again, for bodybuilding each lift should be equally important. Meanwhile powerlifting (attach the definition from google): Powerlifting is a strength sport that consists of three attempts at maximal weight on three lifts: squat, bench press, and deadlift. As in the sport of Olympic weightlifting, it involves the athlete attempting a maximal weight single-lift effort of a barbell loaded with weight plates. Now, if then the debate discussion is about “improving” the practice. Cool, tho seems to me what guys such as Atlaspowershrugged, Grayson Strange and Range of strength are doing is way more fun, overall joint friendly and compatible with bodybuilding. The missing competition part when it comes to odd lifts and so on, it’s just a by product of the novelty of this (actually quite old) trend. And that frankly it’s quite hard to set standard rules. I stand with NH in this one, the only case I personally see powerbuilding beneficial is if a powerlifter wants to try a bit of bodybuilding, as long as the logic of programming has “accessory” lifts and muscles seen as “secondary” gives way too little to someone who’s interested in building mass and pursuing strength aside. I don’t really get why people make fun of Omar calves tho get so easily offended by pointing out that the practice produces subpar physiques.
Hey man do me a favour, if you really did buy one of my programs, the solution is very simple. Please DM me on IG a photo with proof of purchase and I’ll send you a refund ASAP.
@@OmarIsuf dude, I appreciate the gesture. I take it as a lesson, the issue here is not about money. That’s irrelevant, rather the time I spent following a path that wasn’t in line with my goals, cause that doesn’t come back. Tho, I assume my part of responsibility, as they say here in Germany: Dummheit schützt vor strafe nicht.
I think we need to stop using the word powerbuilding and instead just be specific about our goals are and how we think we should program toward those goals. All the following training approaches have been called "powerbuilding". - Doing heavy singles on SBD, and then everything else is purely about hypertrophy. - Doing heavy SBD, and then secondary lifts to help progress on SBD, and then some half-hearted curls and tricep extensions. - Including SBD in your program, but using them for hypertrophy and not caring about 1rm - Wanting to get "strong" in every single exercise you do, from deadlift to forearm curl (which is basically just another way of saying you're valuing progressive overload) To me, the only thing that makes these "powerbuilding" is that they include SBD, but pretty much everything else can vary. So basically, we've given a name to a type of training simply because it includes 3 specific lifts, and I don't think that makes sense. If I do pullups and dips in my hypertrophy focused workout, is it "calisthenicbuilding"? If I train forearms, is it "arm wrestle-building"? If I ride my bike after lifting weights, is that "cyclebuilding?"
After high school, I never did 1 rep maxes, but i always thought i was doing power building due to me getting stronger at the main three compound lifts. I mostly agree fully with the versatility approach of Bald Omni Man and Alex (formerly AlphaDestiny). Just get stronger lift you do, and your muscles will also grow. It is called progressive overload. Even if you didnt add weight, but you did one extra rep than you did last workout, then you got stronger, and then next time maybe you can go up a bit in weight
I think it's possible, this is how I trained as a competitive powerlifter for a large part of a season. I focused on a few heavy topsets, a lot of technique work with the main lifts and then all my assistance was hypertrophic bodybuilding style. When I got within 10 weeks of a meet my block would shift more and more to just focusing on the big 3 and the rest would go into maintenance. It worked well for me, the biggest issue is just time in the gym loading and unloading bars and also making sure I stay in my weight class, which is hard to do if you are gaining a lot of muscle mass lol.
I know you said this was recorded before NH's video, but nonetheless it worked as a "response" or simply just being released after the fact because of the respectful demeanor, conceding fair points and acknowledging criticisms/shortcomings of the methodology in honest faith. Great video fellas!
Much respect. I have about 14 videos filmed but not edited yet (3 more with Pak & Milo, 4 with Mike Israetel, 1 with Eric Helms, a few training videos and topics etc). Just have been behind with the editing. Interestingly enough when we filmed this video, I thought the topic was dead and doubted if it was a good idea to film such a video. And sure enough, you only have to wait in the RU-vid space for a topic to be revived.
I’m a powerlifter. I prioritize the Powerlifts, meaning they come first in the workout. But that doesn’t mean I wimp out on accessories. I push em harder than the compounds because I can recover from them better. Only time it’s not like that is 6-8ish weeks out from competition and things are getting heavy. Am I powerbuilding?
Honestly, Dr. Pak's approach is pretty similar to how my powerbuilding routine is structured, though my volume for the barbell compounds is a little higher. I don't compete, don't have aspirations of competing. I look at powerbuilding like Steve Shaw, I want to be strong on a variety of movements and get big in the process. Following a powerbuilding structure for the past year has unlocked new gains I wasn't getting with a push-pull-legs bodybuilding split with a mostly dynamic double progression model. I know down the line things will change, they always do. But it's getting a little old having people tell me that powerbuilding wastes so much time on the big 3 and doesn't allow enough volume for hypertrophy, that's pure BS, and a misunderstanding of what powerbuilding is! At the end of the day, your program structure isn't the biggest variable in approaching your limit as a natural, so this talk of "what's optimal" is splitting hairs. Training consistency for a long period of time doing hard sets is what matters, as well as FOOD and SLEEP. You can train a lot of ways and get big and strong if you eat enough and sleep, just observe any American football players. I will also say from my own observation, the biggest natural guys at the gym also happen to be the strongest. So trying to divorce strength from size is a ridiculous argument. As Dr. Pak says, you get strong from working in the hypertrophy rep range. All it would take for testing 1RM is a couple strength focused blocks and a peak, if even that if you're technically efficient and experienced.
I am happier now incrementally improving 25 different movements with than fixating on getting my numbers up on 5 compound lifts and treating everything else as just extra work to help facilitate increasing those lifts. With that being said, whatever makes you happy and keeps you training is best as long as you are not doing something that is not conducive to your goals.
My favourite part was OmarIsuf silently sitting and watching the nerds talk, listening intently while outangling all of them, with cuts to him cranking out reps in between. Also, someone get Jeff a damned chair!!
I tried Greg Nuckols' free Stronger by Science strength programs and let me just say, the beginner level program had more sets than I had ever done before in hypertrophy. And it was kinda interesting programming too, for squats you'd start with that approximated 8-10 rep load, but the first set was AMRAP and the rest were AMRAP-2. And that pattern continued all the way down to like 3 rep estimation over the weeks so you were kinda doing the traditional progressing strength, but you didn't leave extra in the tank in case you didn't estimate accurately, and for sure those reps went to failure towards the last sets. I found it pretty nice for a beginner, good reality check. And for sure I was capable of more volume and load that I had anticipated, taught me to push in squats. Like not having spotters I had avoided going too close to failure, but committing to the program my squatting got techniquewise better and I could keep the tension in quads and also finish the rep when the failure approached. And would you agree that if people use under/overrated in serious manner, they often just want to complain that other people don't have the same taste in things and don't have much substance to their message.
You could also do your hypertrophy exercises as a separate workout within the same day or your off days too to keep the training quality for your hypertrophy work. Since you only need 1x a week deadlift, 2x a week squat, 3x a week bench to make significant strength gains
Excellent video because it raised the point that there are many valid points on each side of the debate. Let’s be honest lots of Powerlifting programs start off in power building rep ranges, and reduce as volume is built up. Smolov is a lot of volume but nobody calls it power building. Finally if powerlifters could actually be bothered to lay off the gummy bears and beer - there is a lot of muscle under there 😂
I've been doing "powerbuilding" for a long while now (almost 2 years, and fun fact I go to fortis fitness as well, and we have definitely crossed paths, although I am very anti-social and don't chat up people, just get in get my shit done and leave). After some life problems, I came to fortis at 185lbs in early 2022 and, I've been holding steady at around 225 for several months now, but my bench and deadlift (dropped barbell squat cause my mobility sucks and it just aggravates my elbows and shoulders) are at 350 and 515 respectively (highest ever PRs). I hit new 1 RM prs every 4-6 weeks. I think it's very much an individual thing (genetics "supplementation"... I am on TRT, etc.) Some people can pull off this hybrid, others can't.
IMO If you want to focus on buiding strength, power lift. If you want to focus on building muscle, body build. I also think it would be cool to see a 1 year comparison between someone who focuses entirely on powerbuilding, and someone who half the year focuses on body building, and the other half on power buildind. At the end, you test muscle mass and strength of both.
Very difficult to gauge something like this as everyone develops differently. Lifestyle factors, genetics, food intake and recovery will all be different.
i feel like powerbuilding works best in phases ie: hypertrophy phase more bodybuilding work, then peaking block dial back on the accessories and lower reps.
I'd be open to moderate the discussion between Dr. Milo Wolf & Natural Hypertrophy 100%. I don't think Natural Hypertrophy would want that (I suspect I deadlift too much to be considered unbiased). I believe GVS will be moderating and it is a fantastic choice for a person tbh.
I am having trouble kiinda understanding Dr. Pak's point. Is he saying that powerbuilding can be like a workout that you build up to a single, double or triple in the big three and then the rest of the workout can be focused on actual hypertrophy?
Instead of allocating a huge chunk of your volume towards what a lot of people consider "strength work" (multiple sets of 5 etc), hit a heavy single and a back-off set or 2 and then use the rest of your time to do "hypertrophy" oriented work. For example: BP 1x1@8-9RPE, followed by 1-2 sets of 3 @80-90% of whatever you hit for the single and then all your typical hypertrophy chest/shoulder/tri/whatever work. We have relatively solid data* on PLers being able to make solid gains with just a few heavy sets per lift per week so if you want to combine both 1RM strength and hypertrophy, you can do so relatively easily. (google minimum dose training powerlifting)
To be honest, the only thing overrated here is this silly discussion itself. If there are no set definitions and goals what are we even talking about? All (good) powerbuilding programs service strength and hypertrophy in a periodized way. With block lenghts that keep it interesting for a lot of folks. A bit of both and therefore not 'optimal' for either. Seems so obvious. Not one 'powerbuilder' has the illusion he will become the next CBUM or John Haack.
My own anecdote from the last year: I had taken years away from bench press. I added bench to a BB mesocycle. Over the 3 months I did it, I added 10 lbs to a triple that was performed at the beginning of the workout every week. Ended up working up to a 35 lbs PR (285 at 165lbs BW) with zero joint pain. That probably would have been a good point to do a pure powerlifting style peaking program, but I decided not to risk injury and just get back to BB.
Finally someone on the same page, idk if I’m missing something but I legit don’t see the point of powerlifting methods over conjugate aside from peaking faster which is irrelevant for anyone not in a hurry to peak
Bald Omni-Man has a program like this. He includes low percentage 1-3 rep sets to start the session off. Then everything is 'bodybuilding'. I never tested my 1RM after running because I didn't enjoy it as much since the big three didn't appeal to me in reality-I just didn't know it yet. Now I prefer SSB Squat with my heels elevated or a machine to a barbell squat, prefer RDL's to Deadlifts, and Dips or OHP to Bench Press.
I did Nippards power building programs and it was okay. I think I would have done better if I had offset my training between strength cycles and hypertrophy cycles like I am now.
Would be insane if Omar was able to get someone like Mehdi to talk about the origins of Stronglifts and Mehdi's theory of how compound movements benefit both strength and hypertrophy
Strength is just neurological adaptation. Powerlifting type methods allow you to peak that strength faster but you can still peak without as much specificity. The only other argument from there I can see is can you max the development of the primary movers for x compound while also maxing developing of other muscles. To steelman even if you couldn’t that doesn’t really separate size and strength it just separates individual intent
Horseshyte. I remember when I started reading the wonderful (and sadly missed) Iron Man mag back in the 70s. My favorite contributor was Anthony Ditillo. That man was a power builder. He did most of his work in the 3-5 rep range. He built a LOT of muscle. I keep one of his books on the shelf in my home gym. Look, if you train smart, hard and consistently you will add weight to the bar and get stronger regardless of the rep range. In my lifetime of experience, the weights increase more quickly with lower reps. 10 reps is easier on your joints than 5 reps. 5 reps are easier on your joints than singles. Some exercises are just safer and better suited to higher reps, like tricep work, leg extensions, laterals, headstrap, etc. But train the way you prefer. If you enjoy something you are more likely to stick with it.
To establish the powerbuilding concept as inferior to pure bodybuilding, and pure powerlifting you would have to show that you get better gains in both strength, and size by going through phases of of bodybuilding followed by phases of powerlifting or just strength training. I don't think that has been done. It takes too long to get hypertrophy to not have some hypertrophy work in most of the time. I can understand dropping it for a peaking phase before a competition, but the surest way to get stronger is to get bigger in the long run. If you have goals for strength, and size you have to train for both.
Fortunately I think Omar can be counted on for a nuanced take on these discussions (Iron Culture gang represent), but I feel like the online weightlifting community at large is stuck on this merry-go-round of 'this is the best thing ever' followed by 'this thing sucks' around and around for all of eternity Similarly, many in the community recently went from 'fake natties are bad' to 'is being open about PED usage actually a bad thing'? I get it that everyone needs new discussions and we can't just talk about bench variations and training intensity all the time, but there has to be a better way I also hate when people critique something and offer nothing by means of a solution, which I realize I'm doing. Hypocrisy thy name is... me
@inhim7777777 I think the word can and does mean multiple things. For most people not completely steeped in lifting culture, 'weightlifting' vs 'weight training' is a distinction without a difference. Perhaps my biggest argument is that you knew what I meant when you read the sentence. I would be truly surprised if there was someone who would read my comment and thought I was talking about Oly lifting. If the purpose of language is to facilitate the communication of ideas, and you understood that I was using a colloquial term, I don't think it's in any way necessary to complicate or alter my language when the end result is the same. Now, if you want to be really specific, for 99.9% of competitive snatch + C&J lifters it's also not Olympic weightlifting, it's just weightlifting. If someone told you they were an Olympic wrestler, you wouldn't assume they're just your average folk or Greco-Roman wrestler, you'd assume they were in the Olympics. You could say that Oly lifting is just what people generally call the sport, but people also say when they're at the gym lifting weights that they're, well, weightlifting.
@@AP-qu2li I can't argue with that. I'm a stickler for sure. I like to be 'correct' for the 1% of the time it might make a difference, and in deferense to the weightlifters.
The more you get into the weeds of programming, the greater the differences between strength and size appear. 1RM work doesn't benefit and can hurt hypertrophy. A few compounds are important in powerlifting, every lift is important in hypertrophy. SBD is required, SBD doesn't fit most people for effective size stimulus. Failure is important in hypertrophy, this can take resources away from the big lifts in powerlifting. Powerlifting periodises and peaks its program to achieve maximum performance, hypertrophy needs to maintain high performance to push progress. Even intensity differs in meaning between them.
I mean Alex leonidas did the heavy single on alternating lifts with back offs and that got him to a 405 bench. Sounds like dr paks take on powerbuilding.
This is such a dumb conversation. Hypertrophy - I want to get as big as possible, the fastest. Strength Training - I want to be as strong as possible. (1 Rep Max) Power-building - I want to get stronger and bigger. Stronger doesn't necessitate 1 rep max. It could just be adding weight to the bar. Most gym bro's don't really care about their 1 rep max that much. They just want to add weight to the bar. Adding weight is a lot easier and faster doing 3x5 or 5x5 compared to something like a 10x4. Everything in between Hypertrophy training, and strength training is technically power building.
Powerbuilding with submaximal volume, the correct programming that has the best fatigue management is very underrated. Powerbuilding with bad programming and bad fatigue management is overrated.
Viable /effective = optimal. And if you admit that a bodybuilding specific program is better for hyperthrophy then "powerbuilding " then the conversation is over cause there is no debate here , "powerbuilding" is an abomination for hypertrophy. And if your argument is gonna be : "just do what you enjoy " then don't participate in online bodybuilding discussion and Jeff ,Omar and all the power building crew should delete their channels and rebrand has hippies ( just do what you like brah ..., is not a valid argument )
@@deansheppard1104 powerbuilding was never about optimising hypertrophy lmao. It is about getting great hypertrophy AND strength gains. Its literally in the name. How clueless and obtuse can you be?
And... Does anyone ever tall about general health? Like, wouldnt you be healthiER by combaning strength and size, and resistance and cardio? Would you get the biggest? No. The strongest? No. The fastest? No.. but you could agrue you are being the "healthiest". Why is there literally no talking about training for best overall health? I feel great when I do 2 Powerbuilding rest 3 hypertrophy workous + moderate cardio 3-4 times a week. Will I get the biggest? No, and I am not interested in that. Im actually trying to lose muscle because it becomes really annoying to weight so much when trying to actually do a Sport like Soccer or Swimming.
A periodized approach would be the best way to achieve "powerbuilding." Second to that would be a blended approach that goes through shorter cycles that prioritize one over the other; though including each in the same to varying degree. Considering the former, Jacked & Tan 2.0 is the best off-the-shelf program available to achieve strength and size gains. (My totally unbiased and science-based opinion, obviously.)
Facts. Looking back I think you were one of the first people to do “powerbuilding” most optimally (among programs I have ran): a phasic approach that doesn’t deprioritize the non big 3 lifts.
@@DONQUIIIXOTE Thanks bro! Seems like a lot of arguments about the topic of powerbuilding are limiting the training to just what one workout should look like, rather than what a block of training should look like.
Why would you need to get stronger. Not required in modern life. Just get bigger and more jacked or asthetic. Don’t waste time on stenorth unless you’re trying to prove strength in competition
What if you have enough consistent data that shows back down sets of 8 drive progress on your bench? But you really only care about progressing your bench 1rm. According to the literature I’d be working in hypertrophy rep ranges but I’m also only training for 1rm strength. Is it powerbuilding? I guess my point is this gets so blurry as to what exactly defines it. Which is something that I think this video is getting at.
