Discussion in 'Health & Body' started by Eason, Dec 20, 2009.
JD are you implying that deadlifts don't have a place in bodybuilding?
No, I'm not. But I think that a bodybuilding plan is very different from a strength training plan. Both may include some of the same exercises, though, including deadlifts. I was mostly getting at the idea that I believe a person has to choose whether the priority is fitness or aesthetics. Any lifting program will improve both relative to not lifting at all, but starting a strength training program that involves squats, deadlifts, and pressing, and then worrying that maybe "you aren't spending enough time on your arms" suggests to me that the person is more concerned with aesthetics than strength.
Okay, thanks for clarifying.
I lift 80% for aesthetics and 20% for strength, and I am a 100% firm believer that deadlifts are important for both.
The idea that deadlifts will somehow make you unaesthetic is ridiculous.
Would I be better off getting a squat rack like
for squats and bench press? £90 is cheap even if it will cost that again to ship it down.
I would definitely prefer the second type, as the side-rails are adjustable on that one. The first one seems kind of useless, actually, for that reason.
Worth spending twice as much money on? Probably approx $250 vs $500.
If you are too tall for the first one, you might as well not be squatting in a rack. If you are too short for the first one, you might as well not be squatting.
The situation would be even worse for bench press. You'll either not be able to go down all the way to your chest, or you'll be stopped 6 inches short.
I agree. That first one isn't going to be very useful unless you are exactly the right size for it. Also, the second one has a pull up bar, and you should definitely be doing pull ups.
OK will get the tall one then, cheers.
Good thing about the jubilee is that they won't post anything until I have enough money to order stuff anyway.
power racks break down semi-easily for transport, are more economical in terms of size in your home gym and have much more functionality. squat racks are large, a pain in the ass to break down, and have little functionality outside of squatting. the one i used at the last commercial gym i was at was even too high for me to squat ATG; the bar would hit the safeties before i hit full depth.
your rack will probably stay with you for a long, long time so if there's one thing i would make a good initial investment on, it would be a rack. i would rather spend 500 on something that is useful and stays with me a long time than 250 on something that doesn't even do what you want it to to begin with. keep cruising kijiji man, you should be able to find a nice used rack for 300, tops. anything over that and you're getting fleeced unless its a high-end commercial grade setup. hell, when i was shopping in the states last week there was a decent rack for $300 brand new at dicks sporting goods. i know you're in the uk, but yeah. don't buy a squat rack, they suck. keep hanging out on kijiji, you'll find a cheap one.
just missed out on that. yes, its mostly crap, but i could probably chop the bench into something worthwhile and having an adjustable ab bench thingy would be nice. also, free.
edit: holy fuckaroni, $40 for that . i can't even buy a bench new for less than $100. $60 for this. you could bro out on your own for $100 plus bar+weights. i think i might buy that pulldown actually
It's not entirely fair to quote a self stated rant, but I don't think you're nailing the issue here. Proportion is in the eye of the beholder. And the squatters and deadlifters "probably" think they look a bit better than they really do (which is a fairly common "confident male" trait). But this proportion you refer to would be blatantly out-of-proportion to any guy who trains for modern aesthetics, don't fool yourself.
Everything on Gumtree in the UK seems to be in NI or Scotland, the (very) few bits and pieces I can find in England and Wales nobody responds to my emails. Found one for about $500 new with a max weight of 363kg, (Bodypower cf475) seems to have good reviews on BB.com but the one below that is awful apparently.
i am not trying to brag and i feel tacky even posting this but i did get props itt on my aesthetics, having a nice drop, etc and even getting the backhanded compliment of "captain upper body" despite having a squat and deadlift that far outpace my girly bench numbers. yes, proportion is in the eye of the beholder but considering the validation i got from people who primarily care about aesthetics (fuji, eason, GN, forgive me if this is untrue) i don't think you can write off my observation as a "confident male" thing. i feel kinda dirty posting that, since i am a piss-ant in the world of lifting, but yeah. i don't have zyzz aesthetics, yet he was the one advocating 4x10 deadlifts and if this thread is any indication he's the embodiment of modern aesthetics to those who are after that sort of thing.
though i will concede that internet lifters form a hivemind when it comes to squatting and deadlifting being the answer to everything lifting-related, its very contextual. only squatting 3x a week without a lot of upper body volume? sure, not modern aesthetics, and certainly the cause of stinger's confirmation bias. squatting and deadlifting at a comparatively lower volume than the upper body work being done? aesthetic, assuming the conventional wisdom that more volume = more size holds true. there are far too many related factors in lower body compound volume/frequency/intensity and corresponding upper body volume/frequency/intensity to immediately write off any correlation between squatting/deadlifting and ideal proportions as a negative one. its certainly possible to fit in the mold of "modern aesthetics" while squatting and deadlifting, which was my point to stinger. moreover, even those training for "modern aesthetics" are going to be doing some lower body work - why not squat and/or deadlift if they're able to?
I generally agree with what you are saying. I think that your point about upper body/lower body is a good one. Just squatting and deadlifting ignores a lot of upper body strength. I do, though, think it's important to understand that there are compound, functional movements for training upper body. The post that kicked this conversation off involved a guy saying he doesn't do compound lifts anymore because he felt like focusing more on his arms. I admit that people worrying about their arms is a pet peeve of mine, but obviously there is value in training the upper body - whether for aesthetics or strength. But training the upper body doesn't necessarily drive you to bicep curls/tricep extensions/cable flies and all that other useless nonsense. At the very least the compound lifting trifecta ought to be squat, deadlift, bench. My personal preference - for a number of reasons - is for squat, deadlift, strict press/push jerk. I think that those 3-4 movements should form the core of any lifting regimen, and will sufficiently train both upper and lower body. Add in some bodyweight moves like pushups, pullups, dips and you are training pretty much every compound upper body movement.
I saw the compliments, but I don't know what to tell you. I've seen all the pics here and no one really looks like they lift for aesthetics / hypertrophy / size. That isn't to say people don't look pretty decent, but it's a difference of proportion. People who spend all day jerking on cables or whatever bb'rs do look like they train for it.
I feel everyone should do both, however I do not train for aesthetics, so I do not assume to know what someone who does should lift at any given moment.
Separate names with a comma.