Baggy

Best frequency and reps for muscle definition and gain?

30 posts in this topic

On 3/24/2017 at 10:30 PM, Ultrasonic said:

Hmmmm. Any workout that claims to be good for 'definition and tone' isn't worth reading as far as I'm concerned.

Its pretty good... good for some change for a few weeks..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 21/03/2017 at 5:37 AM, Ultrasonic said:

Probably.

You might benefit from watching the following some time. The first half is about training and the second diet.

 

 

He says he's a sciencist and then "you can't prove anything in science, only disprove it"

Complete crap! And he has a PhD!

Did he buy it on the internet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, JohhnyC said:

 

He says he's a sciencist and then "you can't prove anything in science, only disprove it"

Complete crap! And he has a PhD!

Did he buy it on the internet?

You can download a copy of his PhD thesis if you really want...

The point he was getting at I think is that models like general relativity or quantum theory can be tested in the sense that they make accurate predictions, but not proved to be absolute truth. On the other hand other models can be disproved in the sense of making predictions that are wildly innaccurate/wrong.

(The main body of the talk is the useful bit if course - well done for watching right to the end!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ultrasonic said:

You can download a copy of his PhD thesis if you really want...

The point he was getting at I think is that models like general relativity or quantum theory can be tested in the sense that they make accurate predictions, but not proved to be absolute truth. On the other hand other models can be disproved in the sense of making predictions that are wildly innaccurate/wrong.

(The main body of the talk is the useful bit if course - well done for watching right to the end!)

yeah just a general comment, its a fundamentally wrong statement. There is scope for assumption and the setting parameters of  course or even a loose proof (e.g. proof by induction). My PhD is in maths and lectured in mathematics so very different than nutritional science naturally where sample sets, and drawing conclusions thereof are a necessity.  I get your point about theories and proof being asymptotic to the true "truth", but that is in the general sense of a summation of all knowledge

Anyway not relevant to the topic.I has seen him before and his website. I think he has a tendency to go into too much detail and focus on the unnecessary. For example when he  discuss bench on his website, he starts talking about using lifting shoes chalking your back for purchase on the bench etc. All OTT unless you are really into powerlifting. Overall he definitely knows what he is talking about and has the track record to prove it!

Good talk 

Ultrasonic likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, JohhnyC said:

yeah just a general comment, its a fundamentally wrong statement. There is scope for assumption and the setting parameters of  course or even a loose proof (e.g. proof by induction). My PhD is in maths and lectured in mathematics so very different than nutritional science naturally where sample sets, and drawing conclusions thereof are a necessity.  I get your point about theories and proof being asymptotic to the true "truth", but that is in the general sense of a summation of all knowledge

Anyway not relevant to the topic.I has seen him before and his website. I think he has a tendency to go into too much detail and focus on the unnecessary. For example when he  discuss bench on his website, he starts talking about using lifting shoes chalking your back for purchase on the bench etc. All OTT unless you are really into powerlifting. Overall he definitely knows what he is talking about and has the track record to prove it!

Good talk 

I don't like everything he does or says either but the content of that video is a pretty solid basis for most people to be working with. I used to post links to Eric Helms' pyramid videos but the video above covers the same main ideas more quickly as a starting point. Particularly for beginners focusing on minor details before sorting more important factors.

(My username relates to the subject of my own PhD BTW.)

JohhnyC likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now