Adarq.org

I don't think you realize how much muscle tissue 2 pounds is. Along with that 2 pounds you're holding .8 pounds more glycogen and 1-3 pounds more water. This is without any fat. That's a ridiculous amount of weight gain when you think about it. Over your time lifting you're not going to put more than 30-40 pounds of MUSCLE on unless you're on steroids. Powerlifters and Bodybuilders are all on steroids and this seems to influence people to think you can gain ridiculous amounts. Look at any natural bodybuilder (ones that are actually natural, not ones that compete in natural bodybuilding), and you'll see they aren't really THAT big.

And I agree beginners eat too little, but they don't need to get fat to get strong like you said. They don't even need to lose their abs which Rippetoe seems to think is ridiculous.

I think you guys are still missing the point. I have elaborated on this idea on this board several times now. If, as a novice, you are gaining your 15 lbs per week in the squat and 7.5 lbs per week in the deadlift, powerclean, bench-press and press, you are fine, regardless what you eat. If you stay on your baseline bodyweight, or gain 2 lbs per month, and make ridiculous gains, that is really great for you if you are not also interested in gaining size.
But here is the problem: There are a ton of people that struggle badly to put on strength. And eating more helps them. Now, how MUCH more you need to eat to make consistent progress varies greatly across individuals but can really easily found out via an iterative approach. If you get stuck or can't recover as you should, just eat little bit more. That is not what Rippetoe generally advocates because he knows from experience that people on the internet are usually too dumb to make this happen. So he recommends to just do GOMAD in the case of underweight, young males because this takes care of a large percentage of the necessary calorie, fat and protein intake. So this is the fail-proof approach and guys that follow it and train accordingly make really impressive increases in strength. In fact, they maximize their strength increase, which is really the point of Rippetoe's SS program for novice trainees.
The truth is that guys afraid of losing their abs often are not able to do either of those things. And that is not some kind of dogma made up by Rippetoe, this is just an observation that can and will be made if you are looking.

To address a few specific points:

THERE IS A HAPPY MEDIUM BETWEEN NOT EATING ENOUGH AND BLOWING UP LIKE A FUCKING TRUCK TIRE.

I agree. But the happy medium will not be able to maximize strength gains. I am not suggesting that everyone has to milk out a novice progression to the last pound via eating a ton. But it is helpful to put ones own progress in relation to those that do and see if the typical difference might be worth eating more after all. It is an individual decision and the end of a novice progression is determined by the outcome of such decisions.

I don't think you realize how much muscle tissue 2 pounds is. Along with that 2 pounds you're holding .8 pounds more glycogen and 1-3 pounds more water. This is without any fat. That's a ridiculous amount of weight gain when you think about it. Over your time lifting you're not going to put more than 30-40 pounds of MUSCLE on unless you're on steroids. Powerlifters and Bodybuilders are all on steroids and this seems to influence people to think you can gain ridiculous amounts. Look at any natural bodybuilder (ones that are actually natural, not ones that compete in natural bodybuilding), and you'll see they aren't really THAT big.

And I agree beginners eat too little, but they don't need to get fat to get strong like you said. They don't even need to lose their abs which Rippetoe seems to think is ridiculous.

Natural bodybuilders do not maximize muscle mass increase due to the demands of their competition. Nor do weight-class athletes in other sports. That makes these populations a poor example to demonstrate your point.

If you want to make a point about a maximum possible LBM increase of X lbs per month, then post the scientific evidence and we can discuss whether that conclusion can be validated by the studies methodology, statistical analysis and actual results.

I'll speculate that if you're eating 7000 calories a day to gain mad weight, first thing is don't do that.  But if you will do it regardless like the guy in the picture, you should do a bodybuilders high volume hypetrophy workout with a zillion sets to gain max muscle, a few sets of 5 will not get it done as well. Or maybe you should do the 5s first, and then the extra pump work? Dunno. At least this approach will burn more calorie spending 2-3 hrs in a gym per session and the rest of the time stuffing your face. All I know is the rip faithful walking into the gym 3x a week and not doing anything all week but a few sets of 5 while eating 7000cal will get really fat.

You are actually not aware how hard a couple sets of 5 get at the end of a novice progression. You speak from a standpoint of lacking experience and you are not equipped to have this discussion with us in other regards as well. Do yourself a favor and educate yourself before you bubble this bullshit.

Grinding someone into dust with a heavy 3x5 weight is definitely a hard workout but Pins Into Pillars 10x5 isn't easy either. They're both brutally hard towards the end. I doubt it matters either way, hardness isn't the issue, workload is. You're doing the  entire weekly volume of your novice progression program in just any one PiP workout. Same frequency, both linear programs, different initial intensities but they're ramped up linearly as previously mentioned. My claim is the PiP 10x5s will give better mass gains than the 3x5s because of the extra volume when you're eating obscene amounts of foods. Is that bullshit to you? You'll have to explain why.

I have not tried PiP, but have read Pavel's writing about it. I think its focus is different from what is tried to accomplish via SS. The volume is too big for the progression to last nearly as long as 3x5, one will stall much earlier. It is therefore less efficient for strength increases. The idea behind 3x5 is that it is enough volume to drive adaptation till the next work-out, but not much more than that.
Regarding the question which one is better suited for increases in muscle mass, I do not know and this is not what concerns me. I would assume though that 3x5 due to its longer lasting progression would result in more muscle mass increase mid-to-long term, but maybe not short-term. But that is speculation.

That's all reasonable. I agree with your points and claims on efficiency. So if the choice over the same time interval is -

More Strength + More Fat + Less Muscle  for 3x5 vs
More Muscle + Less Fat + Less Strength for 10x5

My opinion is I'd pick 10x5 here. And I get the feeling a lot of guys here would make the same choice if they realised this tradeoff. You can easily get stronger by using that newly minted muscle after PiP.  Do it the Rippetoe way and rock 32% bodyfat and have bigger lifts but it will take you a long time to get rid of the bodyfat and you don't have as much muscle to show at the end of it, that's even supposing you finish the marathon cut it would take to go from 32% to 12% without losing your hard fought gains.

You are bubbling again. You have neither knowledge nor experience to even argue such a point and you are making shit up as if it was real data. Stop being a nuisance and start listening for a while.

Quote from: steven-miller on July 14, 2012, 11:02:31 am

But a normal guy, who has never been training in his life before and is not starting out as an athlete and who does everything right will probably, for some time, look more like the person on the picture. An athletic person will end up a little leaner than that, but will still carry some bodyfat.

explain this then. if rippetoes is so efficient why does it have less impressive results in terms of less muscle gain and more fat gain for the normal guy than the athletic one.

Because people select themselves into environments where they can experience positive things, such as success. Additionally an environment like competitive sports selects for people with an inherent aptitude to do physical things. Both mechanisms lead to there being more genetic potential in the population of "athletes" compared to the population of "normal guys". Therefore the likelihood of an athlete doing exceptionally well on any program compared to a normal guy is very high.

The bottom line is that you will have to accept a larger gain of body-fat with every pound of muscle if you are a less apt individual compared to the more apt individuals. This is not specific to Rip's program, it is universally true.

I didn't say only gain 2 pounds a month in the beginning stages. I said you can gain 2 pounds of muscle. Muscle =/= LBM and Fat

And I think Natural Bodybuilders are a good example because Rippetoe acts like it is so easy to get the fat off after you bulk up. That's just not true. It's really hard to cut that much weight (especially when you gain 25-40 pounds of fat in your bulk like Rippetoe is suggesting)and not lose a lot of muscle.

I don't see why you think eating 5000 calories as opposed to 4000 calories will put on more muscle. It doesn't work that way. I am searching for the "studies" but anyone with any knowledge of protein synthesis and muscle hypertrophy should understand this. Your body doesn't "store" calories as muscle, it stores them as fat.

Quote from: denisbeck on P&B

Then while I was up I got hungry, so I woke my hoochie momma up and made her cook me a meal to get more calories. Yeah she bitched sometimes, but I told her if she ever wanted me to deliver the goods, she better get her ass otta bed. That lit a fire under her ass let me tell you. Hehe.

Lmao, that's a real man if I've ever seen one. What a hero.