Teenage weight training

[Tiggsy]

Olympic gymnast are perhaps not the ideal comparison though....they are (like anyone at that level) freaks - and 4ft tall so a 10" arm looks huge! Not to mention spending hours a day training.

Take two "normals" - you will get one bigger quicker on weights than the one you get playing on rings.

[goldblum]

Tiggsy said:

Olympic gymnast are perhaps not the ideal comparison though....they are (like anyone at that level) freaks - and 4ft tall so a 10" arm looks huge! Not to mention spending hours a day training.

Take two "normals" - you will get one bigger quicker on weights than the one you get playing on rings.

I agree.But which do you think will be stronger?

[deadmau5]

goldblum said:

Tiggsy said:

Olympic gymnast are perhaps not the ideal comparison though....they are (like anyone at that level) freaks - and 4ft tall so a 10" arm looks huge! Not to mention spending hours a day training.

Take two "normals" - you will get one bigger quicker on weights than the one you get playing on rings.

I agree.But which do you think will be stronger?

If the guy in the gym was training to get strong then he would be stronger. Gymnastics gets you strong, but it's not some magical method. Professional gymnasts train every day to be a better gymnast, not to get stronger. Someone who dedicated them self to getting stronger will be stronger.

[goldblum]

deadmau5 said:

goldblum said:

Tiggsy said:

Olympic gymnast are perhaps not the ideal comparison though....they are (like anyone at that level) freaks - and 4ft tall so a 10" arm looks huge! Not to mention spending hours a day training.

Take two "normals" - you will get one bigger quicker on weights than the one you get playing on rings.

I agree.But which do you think will be stronger?

If the guy in the gym was training to get strong then he would be stronger. Gymnastics gets you strong, but it's not some magical method. Professional gymnasts train every day to be a better gymnast, not to get stronger. Someone who dedicated them self to getting stronger will be stronger.

The guy in the gym isn't though.He's training for physique,as mentioned in the post my reply addresses.

[deadmau5]

goldblum said:

deadmau5 said:

goldblum said:

Tiggsy said:

Olympic gymnast are perhaps not the ideal comparison though....they are (like anyone at that level) freaks - and 4ft tall so a 10" arm looks huge! Not to mention spending hours a day training.

Take two "normals" - you will get one bigger quicker on weights than the one you get playing on rings.

I agree.But which do you think will be stronger?

If the guy in the gym was training to get strong then he would be stronger. Gymnastics gets you strong, but it's not some magical method. Professional gymnasts train every day to be a better gymnast, not to get stronger. Someone who dedicated them self to getting stronger will be stronger.

The guy in the gym isn't though.He's training for physique,as mentioned in the post my reply addresses.

It doesn't say what he's training with the weights though. Is the 'normal' on a strength or hypertrophy programme? There are too many variables to give a definitive answer.

[B3njamin]

goldblum said:

Most of the martial artists I know crosstrain and mainly do gymnastics,climbing,running and bodyweight exercises.From reading your latest post I think you are making an association between hypertrophy and strength,but this is not the case.Most bodybuilders train for the bodyshape,and what strength they gain is a byproduct.This makes them stronger than the average person but not as strong as a gymnast or bodyweight enthusiast of a similar weight.There are many 14 stone gymnasts who can easily outlift their bodybuilding counterparts..if you'd said powerlifting it might be different.But you don't get any 'huge' gymnasts so above 15 stone a dedicated weightlifter should have a better physique.For years I trained mostly bodyweight and have stretch marks in my armpits and on my glutes.According to my girlfriend.

Low strength and poor physique?

With respect I didn't mention bodybuilding, that was something of a false assumption, powerlifting is probably the nearest thing I do, aiming to increase the weight I can lift with emphasis on the olympic lifts, the size being a nice side effect. I'm not a bodybuilder and although I have good strength to weight ratio, I wouldn't get anywhere near those who train for size in terms of 200kg+ deadlifts, squats etc... although in fairness I'd favour my chances regarding bodyweight exercises such as levers and holds as well as being able to tumble but this doesn't make either of us weak, we just train for different goals.

I've done a lot of pure bodyweight training in the past and now I do a lot more weight training - of the two, in my experience, weight lifting has given me greater gains in strength and size. I assumed a 14 year old would be lifting for one of these two goals and since it has worked well for me, I was inclined to recommend weight lifting in preference to bodyweight exercises. Of course, with the strength gains from weight lifting said person could then go on to the technical levers and freezes if they so wish, the weight lifting serving to get them to the level of strength required faster than bodyweight exercises alone.

Of course, as with many things the answer is bound to be something along the lines of "Whatever works for you is the correct way to do it" and I think both methods have their merits but if I had to chose a side and nail my allegiance to one side, it would be weight lifting.

Likewise I trained for years with bodyweight doing gymnastics, gaining some size as well as strength however I haven't got any stretch marks - perhaps I was lucky, although I'm not aware of any of the other gymnasts that I trained with getting stretch marks; it is admittedly, not something you tend to discuss often!

[didelydoo]

I'm of the opinion that training for strength with some higher rep stuff as assistance is the best way to get both bigger and stronger, providing you eat enough. Most gym goers fail on both fronts as they simply dont put in the effort consistently. Consistently being the key word.

[goldblum]

deadmau5 said:

It doesn't say what he's training with the weights though. Is the 'normal' on a strength or hypertrophy programme? There are too many variables to give a definitive answer.

Yes,actually it does.Yes again.

B3njamin said:

I just think that based upon my experience of both, I found weightlifting gave better results in regards to strength and size.

Bodybuilding,muscle hypertrophy,whatever you call it...falls into a very specific range of %RM and reps.The reply above clearly implies the poster trained for

size and strength.There's only two other types of weight training,endurance and power,of which he mentions neither!

[goldblum]

B3njamin said:

With respect I didn't mention bodybuilding,

No you mentioned strength and size training;according to every source I can think of that's the same thing,is it not?

[Meoricin]

B3njamin said:

Well a rapid increase or decrease in body mass can cause them - however building muscle isn't exactly a quick process (Much to the dismay of many) so unless you are ballooning in weight due to some sort of monster genetic gift or synthetic assistance, vis AAS, I still don't really buy it, sorry.

I have them on each side, running from my shoulder to under my armpit, from when I started really pushing my bench press and other upper-body stuff (rather than just doing bodyweight and being happy with it). I've also had them across both thighs and on my arse from when I first started lifting (squats were my go-to exercise). Four years on, and the thigh/arse ones are mostly gone, and there is only one major one on each side of my upper body (rather than a whole set on each side).

Mine are purely from muscle growth, and I wasn't much skinnier before I started - size-wise I've maybe added 50% while changing from fat to muscle.

Edited by Meoricin on Wednesday 16th November 14:40

[Tiggsy]

goldblum said:

Tiggsy said:

Olympic gymnast are perhaps not the ideal comparison though....they are (like anyone at that level) freaks - and 4ft tall so a 10" arm looks huge! Not to mention spending hours a day training.

Take two "normals" - you will get one bigger quicker on weights than the one you get playing on rings.

I agree.But which do you think will be stronger?

The OP is asking about a kid....I'd imagine, given that's it 2011 and he has no need to fight bears and every need to attract girl kids - he's after size, not strength.

[B3njamin]

goldblum said:

No you mentioned strength and size training;according to every source I can think of that's the same thing,is it not?

I advocated weight training as I have found it good for increasing strength as well as a consequence, size; since I found the results better than those from bodyweight training, I saw fit to suggest it for the young lad in question, since one of these will match one if not both of his goals.

I don't see why becoming stronger and muscle sized increasing need be mutually exclusive. I work with a focus on constantly lifting more weight, without much regard to building muscle-quite at odds with anything those I know who bodybuild work for-however, I've found that I've added a pleasing amount of size regardless and am happy with the results so far.

I'm not even sure what the argument is any more - I acknowledge that bodyweight training is fantastic and that I still do it, I just found better results from weight training and as a result I feel it is a better approach. Perhaps it's because you reach a point where your body becomes very efficient at holding and lifting its own mass and adding more intensity becomes harder, that weight lifting works better, I don't know. I can only speak from experience and that experience is that resistance training with weights, if you have to pick an either or scenario, is more effective at building both size and strength; or either one if you prioritise a particular goal.

[goldblum]

Tiggsy said:

goldblum said:

Tiggsy said:

Olympic gymnast are perhaps not the ideal comparison though....they are (like anyone at that level) freaks - and 4ft tall so a 10" arm looks huge! Not to mention spending hours a day training.

Take two "normals" - you will get one bigger quicker on weights than the one you get playing on rings.

I agree.But which do you think will be stronger?

The OP is asking about a kid.. .

I know.

So..'take two normals' and..'which do you think will be stronger'?? Answer on a postcard?

[didelydoo]

goldblum said:

I know.

So..'take two normals' and..'which do you think will be stronger'?? Answer on a postcard?

Stronger at what? Pull ups or squatting? Benching or rowing? etc etc. Again, all relative to what aspect of strength you're trying to obtain.

Both BW work and lifting weights will get you strong and looking good. However, weights will get you stronger in the long run.

[goldblum]

didelydoo said:

goldblum said:

I know.

So..'take two normals' and..'which do you think will be stronger'?? Answer on a postcard?

Stronger at what? Pull ups or squatting? Benching or rowing? etc etc. Again, all relative to what aspect of strength you're trying to obtain.

Both BW work and lifting weights will get you strong and looking good. However, weights will get you stronger in the long run.

Yes,strength would be hard to quantify across the disciplines.I'm not sure about your final statement though;but I would contend that in a competition up to

say..1RM,a gymnast would win more lifts.I am talking versus bodybuilder here,and similar bodyweight.Now if the comp. was for reps...

[goldblum]

No gymnastics! Loads of this style training cropping up all over.I think some might be surprised what this chaps 1RM on the bench might be.

http://youtu.be/_8zpYw0m8sQ

[Halb]

goldblum said:

No gymnastics! Loads of this style training cropping up all over.I think some might be surprised what this chaps 1RM on the bench might be.

http://youtu.be/_8zpYw0m8sQ

What is it?

[goldblum]

Halb said:

What is it?

It's bodyweight exercise trendsetter Hannibal going through some moves down the park.You have to be clever,but you can get very strong and big..

[Animal]

goldblum said:

Halb said:

What is it?

It's bodyweight exercise trendsetter Hannibal going through some moves down the park.You have to be clever,but you can get very strong and big..

He's inhuman. I've given up watching his videos, he just makes me feel bad about myself...

[didelydoo]

goldblum said:

Yes,strength would be hard to quantify across the disciplines.I'm not sure about your final statement though;but I would contend that in a competition up to

say..1RM,a gymnast would win more lifts.I am talking versus bodybuilder here,and similar bodyweight.Now if the comp. was for reps...

Versus a body builder of similar stature, I reckon you'd be right. (I was thinking along the lines of some one who trains for strength)