Question of Strength: June
by Charles Poliquin
Cheater, Cheater...
Q: What do you think of cheat reps, like using a little body English to force out an extra rep or two of biceps curls?
A: I don't have a problem with so-called "cheat" movements if they're being used to overcome the concentric range so you can use more weight on the eccentric portion of the lift.
In other words, you cheat the curl up (concentric range) because you want to lower a heavier load than you can lift, focusing on the negative. That's an eccentric curl.
Now, if a guy says he can curl 200 for 8 reps, but every rep gets worse and worse, then he can't curl 200 for 8 — he can
cheat curl 200 for 8.
Cheat movements can also be used to extend the duration of a set. So for example, you could perform six good reps, then swing up the last two so you can then lower them under control. I think that's fine.
The problem is that most people who do cheat curls also do cheat bench, cheat deadlift, etc. They let their ego get in the way.
So, there are two times when cheat movements are fine:
1) To extend a set at the concentric range after strength has been exhausted.
2) As a way to bypass the concentric range to do eccentric-only reps. You just have to make sure you're viewing this as an eccentric curl workout.
One good application of a cheat movement is to power clean a weight so you can lower it under control in a reverse barbell curl.
Another example would be to push press or push jerk a weight, then eccentrically lower the weight under control.
The point is that you don't want to be like that clown from the Eastern seaboard that used to claim these excessive loads where he did 40% of the work and some other morons would "spot" the rest. One thing I must concede, his spotter had superb trap development.
How Much Protein?
Q: Is the old "gram of protein per pound of body weight" rule still good? I hear some coaches say we need less and some recommend 300 grams a day for a 200 pounder.
A: For a 200-pound lean male, 300 grams of protein per day would be the
minimum. In fact, I think the rule should be closer to 2 grams of protein per pound of body weight, assuming the person is lean.
For about 70% of the population who isn't carb tolerant, 2 grams per pound is good for mass gains. It can make a huge difference. Personally, I couldn't get above 192 pounds until bodybuilder Milos Sarcev convinced me to get 2 grams of protein per pound of body weight. In no time I was up to 205, lean.
Now, if a person is carb tolerant (he handles carbohydrates very well), that value would drop to 1 to 1.5 grams of protein per pound of body weight.
Someone like Christian Thibaudeau, who's not carb tolerant, should be getting 2 grams of protein per pound, but a guy like Milos Sarcev, who can wake up and drink a gallon mixture of 50% maple syrup and 50% dextrose without it affecting his blood sugar, I'd say 1 to 1.5 grams. Rare guys like Milos need to eat 70% of their calories from carbs.
Milos Sarcev
It has to be individualized to an extent. Still, most people don't "deserve" the carbs they eat. The rule for most people is this: you have to
earn your carbs.
The Truth About the Overhead Squat
Q: The overhead squat: good exercise or fad movement of the moment? And is it good for hypertrophy?
A: The overhead squat sucks for size gains. But as an assessment tool, it's unbeatable.
You can actually predict a player's risk of lower body injury playing his sport just by assessing how close to perfect form he can get with the overhead squat. Perfect form equals extremely low risk of injury, and research groups in Sweden and Switzerland have clearly demonstrated this in various studies. At the PICP (Poliquin International Certification Program) at level 3, we use it extensively in the prehab/rehab module.
Why does it suck for size gains? Because hypertrophy comes from the product of time under tension times load. It's got to be heavy enough and last long enough. That doesn't happen with the overhead squat.
Even Olympic lifters don't do the overhead squat anymore. People in the know stopped doing them in 1975. It's a forgotten exercise for training purposes... for good reasons.
The only reason people find them challenging is if they're not flexible. It's one of those exercises that looks cool but it's a total waste of time unless you're a novice Olympic lifter learning the ropes. It's like taking a guy who can bench 400 pounds and making him do decline bench with the pink dumbbells with a Bodyblade acting as rectal probe. The question is,
why?
Hmm, maybe we should call this column, "Ask the Contrarian", eh?
Ven 20 Juin - 7:53 par mihou