Show to Show

Hey all. Not sure where else to put this, so I decided to pop this article here.

This is a blog from Scott Abel readdressing a training topic that he's covered before. The principles are fundamental, though, if you're serious about building a physique.

I'm an example of how well these principles work in terms of both development and strength! Now we're on to the fun stuff in my protocol: fine-tuning, streamlining, balancing, really achieving that ultimate figure look.

I've been prepping since early March for a June 26 show. This is my longest prep, as I wanted to give it lots of time. After my October show (where I won masters figure), I went back to a traditional program. Straight sets. Hardcore, heavy lifting. Since March, I've been doing an advanced hybrid program, which is a combination of MET (functional movements/human movement model/maximizing O2 debt, continuing before complete recovery, etc.). This program is KILLER. I've just been loving it. We added a sprint day two weeks ago to harden up the leggies. I do ONE session of 30 minutes on the bike PER WEEK. That's it. Everything about this program is designed to get me cut and lean. It's soooo cool!!

Anyway, here's the article intro, with a link to the whole thing:

The Chicken and the Egg Dilemma: One Last Time (Part 1)
by Scott Abel

Development. That is the goal of modern bodybuilding and cosmetic physique enhancement. I think I know a little bit about this. At my first contest I weighed in at 154lbs in 1983. By 1987, I won the Great Lakes Classic at a bodyweight of 235lbs (unheard of back then; in fact my closest “heavyweight” competitor back then barely cracked 200 lbs). And at my last ever appearance on stage, guest posing at the Toronto Pro Show in 2004, I weighed just under 260 lbs. And yes; I have a secret. (Deliberate use of industry buzzword as “sarcasm” here.)

The secret is my main tenets of Innervation Training that took me away from the common accepted knowledge of the time. And my physique soared as a result. And this approach is even more important today; as the same arguments of how to build a physique continue. I find it boring and monotonous, to be honest, which is why I seldom address it (except in my book, The Abel Approach). And it’s ironic that these arguments seem to be divided among two different camps. One camp seems to represent the “Science of Strength” while the other camp seems to represent the “Experience of Tradition.” So what is the debate?

Well the debate is as alive now as it has been since the early dawn of the strength industry. And here it is: "Train for strength and development will come, or train for development and strength will come." I’m here to tell you one of these is correct, and the other is, well, not. As I will show there has been a misinterpretation and misapplication of the science involved. And I will get to that in Part 2. But first some relevant points.

Where most people seem to sit on one side of the debate or another usually has to do with their own training biases. For the sake of objectivity, that includes me. But here’s the thing. The capacity for low rep strength is pretty much genetic. Bone length, tendon insertions, tendon thickness, ligament structure and ligament laxity, even gene expression; all have a profound influence on someone’s genetic capacity to “be strong.” Read that again X 10! But this reality is seldom addressed and it becomes very misleading. (And this doesn’t even begin to cover the basics of the energy systems contribution.) The reality is that individuals with a capacity to be quite strong would still garner great development by training for development first and not low rep strength, limit strength expression; what we label as 1RM strength. And for the record what I mean here by the loose use of the term strength, is “load” strength, as in how much you lift.

However, the reverse is NOT true. People without a genetic capacity for low rep strength will not garner much development by training for max strength in the hopes of acquiring size and shape. In fact, if you are like I am, then training for low rep strength usually only yields two guaranteed results; injury and frustration. The one main tenet of Innervation Training which is now (and always has been) supported by research, and the real world of training is that intensity is more important than strength. Now, read that sentence again X 10. Or, put another way, max efforts are far more important in training application than are max reps. Or yet another way, intensity produces strength, intensity and max strength are NOT the same... .

Here's the link to the rest of the article:
http://scottabel.blogspot.com/2010/0...last-time.html

(BTW, in addition to gaining mass, I've gotten crazy strong on Scott's programs. Surprised myself, actually.)

Here's a pic from my first show (June 2007), one from 3 days out from my most recent show (Oct. 2009), and one taken two weeks ago, at 6 weeks out.

As you can see, I'm bottom heavy. Which makes competing a challenge. However, I'm not one to let something like a lack of an x-frame stop me. Through some majorly challenging training protocols, I've put some size on my upper body to balance out my hips and quads.

My goals are to keep those shoulders nice and full and get the hips, thighs, and glutes as streamlined as possible. Fun stuff!!! :) And I didn't start getting serious about any of this until I was nearly 40.

It's never too late! :)

I'm 5'4 1/2" tall, was 127 lbs before water drop in the middle photo, so I was probably 124-125 lbs. or so on stage?

In the first photo, I was around 117-119 lbs on stage. I've had implants done, which weigh three pounds, so I think I've put on about 4-5 lbs of lean mass in the last few years (that's my best guess). It's not much, but what a huge difference it's made in how I look...

Great look. Congratulations you sculpted a very good physique. Where do you compete?

Stunning!

Wow you look great

Well......I'm impressed.

Thanks you guys!! I'll post more pics at the end of this week.

I cannot believe the changes in the last month. Everything I've been hoping for as far has hardening up my lower body and improve the look of my quads.

Damn. Too much fun.

I did my last sprint workout this a.m. (in Red Deer, after Northerns where my BF got 4th in Men's Masters. Boo-yaaaa!), and all that kept running through my head was "high and tight!!" Weird. I was saying that to my butt.

But it WILL be high and tight. For me, it's all about the waist down. It's my goal to be hard and lean and tight.

It's going great. Should be dialed in SPOT ON for Alberta Provincials on June 26.

good post. interesting read. i dont agree with a lot of things abel does / says, but that was a well written article.

Well, legs are separating and hardening out and upper body is staying full!!! Thank God.

I know a lot of women have the same issue: in order to get the lower body to come in, you feel like you're losing upper body mass and fullness.

I'm far from the perfect genetic specimen for figure, but all this work and a DAMN well-designed training protocol is paying off in spades.

Couple few more pounds to go, water drop, couple a little posing tweaks and we are go for launch, June 26.

BTW, these pics weren't taken first thing in the a.m., dry. I'd eaten, drunk, and run around before taking them.

DAYUM! your looking great! GREAT work!