OneBuckeye;1219753 wrote:I've gone the gold bond route. Works well betwen washes, but a wash doesn't even get the stench out. I still wear them to the gym and hiking, but not to dinner or other social settings. I like the Merrell's because i can easily wear socks.

OneBuckeye;1219753 wrote:I've gone the gold bond route. Works well betwen washes, but a wash doesn't even get the stench out. I still wear them to the gym and hiking, but not to dinner or other social settings. I like the Merrell's because i can easily wear socks.

[URL="http://www.marksdailyapple.com/dear-mark-training-edition/#axzz21XuzOurL"][INDENT]Dear Mark,
[/INDENT][INDENT]Training for strength versus training for hypertrophy — does one have to come at the expense of the other?
Ever since adopting the ancestral health lifestyle in September of 2010, I’ve made substantial strength gains and put on a good 20 pounds of lean muscle mass — from 5-foot-10, 155 pounds to 175 pounds.
My delts, upper back and chest have responded favorably to the compound movements I’ve adopted into my training routine — bench press, overhead press, deadlift, weighted pull-ups, weighted dips. In other words, none of that sissy isolation stuff that seemingly every gym-goer performs religiously. I’m a fan of the Stronglifts 5X5 protocol. That is, five sets of five reps with the heaviest load I can lift.
The squat rack at my local (insert big-name gym franchise here) is hardly ever used. Very rarely does anyone attempt to bench press more than 185 pounds. The bros tend to congregate around the EZ Bar rack, performing triceps extensions and bicep curls to their hearts’ content.
What troubles me is that while I’m pound-for-pound stronger than any other gym-goer I’ve encountered, most of the regulars are, to put it one way, far more jacked. Their arms are flat-out bigger. Yet they throw around a lot less weight, preferring higher reps and a lighter load.
These observations seem to run counter to your suggestions, which I’ve based my training philosophy on. Could there be some truth to the widely-held Broscience notions that favor volume lifting for muscle-building? Does that even make sense from an evolutionary perspective? Or am I just doing something wrong?
Thanks!

Max
[/INDENT][LEFT]There actually is some truth to the “broscience.” A 2007 meta-analysis of the available literature found that lifting 60%-85% of your 1RM max for reps is probably the most effective way to stimulate hypertrophy. Reps-wise, that translates to about 6-12 reps per set. Since you’re currently doing 5 sets of 5, try reducing the weight and increasing the reps to between 6-8, which is a nice sweet spot for strength and size. To focus more on size, move the reps up to between 8-10. You may not even have to drop the weight as much as someone coming from a 3×5 program, because 5×5 has prepared you for a good amount of volume.Another option is to vary your reps and sets over the week. Do a heavy day of lower reps one day, maybe sets of three, then do a day of high reps, maybe sets of eight or ten. Play around with it to find what works.It sounds like you’re mainly concerned with the size of your arms. 5’10 and 175 is pretty solid, but heavy squats and deadlifts can famously steer weight toward the lower body while leaving the upper body somewhat T-rex-esque. Am I right? Don’t worry, and just throw in some barbell curls, weighted pullups/chinups, lying tricep extensions, and weighted dips once or twice a week. Most of these are compound exercises, so you won’t be giving up Primal cred. You may not even have to vary your rep scheme if you relent and throw in some arm-centric stuff.The good news is that you’ve built an excellent base of strength, a foundation upon which you can begin adding volume and hypertrophy-centric training. By starting with strength and then worrying about hypertrophy, you’re doing things the right way, and I’d bet a large sum of money that, in a year’s time, you’ll be in a better spot – strengthwise and sizewise – than the guys at the gym who neglect the compound lifts.As mentioned in the previous answer, hypertrophy also comes down to diet. What I find is that lifting heavy for moderate reps puts a person at their baseline hypertrophy. To put on more muscle than you already have lifting heavy, you’re going to have to eat a lot. Protein is important, of course, and fat provides energy, fat-soluble vitamins, and hormonal precursors for important anabolics, but you’ll probably need to incorporate some carbs. The carbs will allow you to get more calories in, and they’ll support a shift toward higher reps and more volume by replenishing glycogen.I think it makes sense, evolutionarily. If you look at photos of hunter-gatherers (perhaps our likeliest Grok analogues), they can be lean, “cut,” and strong, but not bodybuilder big. Strong arms are useful, but eventually you reach a point of diminishing returns. Would having bigger arms really help this guy do what he needs to do – bag game, support his family, gather food? Walking around with a perma-pump and 18-inch biceps simply doesn’t make sense in his situation.Whatever you do, don’t limit yourself based on ideology. If you want big muscles, get big muscles. Just realize that you may have hit your “limit,” and you’ll probably have to adopt some evolutionarily “novel” strategies, like stuffing yourself with food and lifting heavy things over and over again for more reps than you otherwise would.

Read more: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/dear-mark-training-edition/#ixzz21XvvrFWm[/LEFT]

vdubb96;1508467 wrote:No doubt!!! Don't let it hit your face!