Jannes

@Carl-Richard I edited my original comment so much could you please reply to that one? Sorry. I can answer parts of your answer though. Well you quoted Dr Mike directly. If you want to critique him in such a major way then it should be accurate. Well I dont train nowhere near whats optimal for hypertrophy, I train in a way thats optimal for hypertrophy but do a few sets. Well I heard somewhere that grip strength is incredibly important for longevity. Oftentimes you cant find perfect 1 to 1 comparisons. But alright I agree, Eddie is significantly stronger. You know when you hit a some heavy sets of deadlifts and you have zero interest in continuing the workout as you just feel washed. Your muscles could continue but your system just doenst want to go anymore? Thats what I mean. There are also more scientific explanations out there which I cant provide tbh

That study says that 3x10 is about as hypertophic as 7x3 Well that just proves my point that higher reps are better for hypertrophy. Each set for 3 reps will likely be even more fatiguing then the set for 10 reps while not even being half as hypertrophic. If the science is indeed unclear about it then no it isnt pre-rational. The science seems to be pretty clear about it though so I dont see good arguments how one could justify to disregard it. Its personally what I care about most. I want to look good and I want to built a functional body with lots of longevity. I dont care how much I deadlift if it doesnt help me with these things. The 80/20 rule could be true in that context, that you need the last 80 percent of muscle to get the last 20 percent of strength. But that would imply that strength and muscle arent strongly connected with each other as you can have lots of strength and very little muscle. The argumentation get strong to get big doenst really hit the nail then. By that standard Larry Wheels would be almost as muscular as "Eddie Hall / Brian Shaw / Greg Kovac" because he is almost as strong if strength is what makes you muscular. If you like strength and like to train with low reps and dont care about managing your ressources perfectly to optimize hypertrophy then there is nothing wrong with doing heavy sets. It will also be somewhat hypertrophic. I am simply arguing about what optimizes hypertrophy. Maintenence volume is very low. Studies show you can train with 1/9th of your muscle building volume and maintain all of your gains.

Wondering about that as well. His account isnt deleted. You know more? I know about his temperament.. and he was often in conflict with Leo. He had zero respect for Leo as an authority figure, sometimes his tone was disrespectful and sometimes he pointed out flaws in Leo. I feel like he wasnt an unhealthy presence but I would imagine that it would be hard for Leo to tolerate.

For hypertrophy the range is 5 - 30 reps. Dr. Mike would never say 3 - 5 reps in this context. No I assume there are no studies who look at exactly that. Studies just give general pointers into what you train with your rep ranges etc. Ofc a rep isnt perfectly defined but the pointer 5- 30 reps for hyperthrophy suggests that 1 rep or 100 reps if they arent performed in a very unusal way are likely not that effective for hypertrophy. Well I argue about whats best for hyperthrophy. Obviously if thats not the goal the optimal training must look very different. He isnt as strong as the strongest but the strength gap isnt huge while the muscle size grap is pretty massive. But even Eddie Hall will also have some hyperthorphy built into his training regiment as he needs the muscle size to use for strength later. I think we already argued about that and Eddie Hall in this context specifically.

Is it purely a hyperthrophy program or also about strength?

That like the most basic pointer of science. I see the point of going inwards and listening to your bodies signals and intelligence but if you keep science completly out of it, it becomes a mythical pre-rational not so sophisticated approach I feel like. Size and strengh arent antithetical to one another, you can certainly be very strong and also very muscular. Strength implies a certain degree of size and muscle a certain degree of strength. But look at Larry Wheels for example, he has a muscular built of cause but is nowhere near in size compared to Olympians out there who dont have the strength of him. Like Kai Greene:

In RV I sometimes have an impression which I cant really put into words so I safe the safe details, like I have some impression which is about something and a detail is that it is purple, so I write down purple. That seems to be a mistake, I should capture the gist of it and if it isnt about that detail I shouldnt write it down. I had the impression freedom/ capturing today and the target was a baby turtle coming out of its egg and this was the gist of the impression which was hard to capture and I almost missed it.

Sure, but everything below 5 reps isnt optimal for hypertrophy.

Do you know the term ego lifting? Ofc there are legit cases of people being interested in powerlifting.

How does white respond to Black Queen c1 in your scenario?

Why would you test your strength for a 1 rep max if you can do it for reps? You can test your 10 rep max and then again 3-6 month later again. 1 rep max performance heavily depends on your central nervous system which is why skinny lifter can sometimes lift insane numbers. Their nervous system is just well trained.

Black Queen to to c3 to grap the Bishop. Whites best move seems to be white Bishop to c2, threatening to mate on the h7 square with the white Queen next turn and also discover attacking the Black Queen with a Rook. Black Queen to g5 buys a turn and gets the Queen out of danger. White can offer a Queen trade with white Queen to g4, or retreat the white King to h1 in which case Black needs to cover the threat of mate on h7. The lower Black Knight to f6 seems like a solid choice as it also forces the Queen out.

This is hilarious. Will continue watching it tomorrow:

I just remember a friend always liked stunlock me when he asked me a question which ended with " ... but what does it really mean?" I only noticed that when he showed that to a friend of mine.

This wasnt covered by any of my news sources. Is this a troll for clicks? I expect some of that. This is the source they quoted on Reddit, but I dont know if it is legit: https://www.justice.gov/multimedia/Court Records/Giuffre v. Maxwell, No. 115-cv-07433 (S.D.N.Y. 2015)/1332-16.pdf