If you are a distance runner and eat like one then you will put on virtually no muscle, anyway. That isn't how the body works.
If you are a distance runner and eat like one then you will put on virtually no muscle, anyway. That isn't how the body works.
To defend an earlier poster, it IS almost impossible to get stronger and not hypertrophy. All types of weight lifting result in hypertrophy. The difference is that one type (sarcoplasmic) makes your muscles big like a bodybuilders, while another (myofibrillar) affects the actual strength of the muscle with less increase in size.
In question wrote:
To defend an earlier poster, it IS almost impossible to get stronger and not hypertrophy. All types of weight lifting result in hypertrophy. The difference is that one type (sarcoplasmic) makes your muscles big like a bodybuilders, while another (myofibrillar) affects the actual strength of the muscle with less increase in size.
There is no evidence supporting the notion that you can selectively create different "kinds" of hypertrophy.
Muscle&Hustle wrote:
http://mytwocentsoncoaching.blogspot.com/2011/01/running-biomechanics-rationalization.htmlpretty decent blogpost dealing with this topic. Heavy weights, Lower repetitions. The old school philosophy of light weight high reps is out of date.
Not so Old School.
Percy Cerutty preached Heavy weights-Low Repititions many years ago.It helped Elliott to an Olympic Gold Medal and WR.
Low reps/high reps should be matched to phenotype if we are talking elite. Just like you can't take an elite marathoner and make him an 800 champ.
For the rest of us, calories are far more important than reps.
1-5 reps, 10-12 reps, 99 reps...you won't put on size, even using steroids (besides water) without the calories.
Try different routines. Experiment. See what works best for you. Same goes for diet.
Look up Starting Strength by Mark Rippetoe.
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=998224
It is a workout plan for strength novices focusing on compound exercises (multiple muscles groups). Thus it does not isolate any muscles, like body builders do, in order to bulk them up and show them off. You can also probably cut out the Rows and Dips if this is a workout strictly for running, and I might even recommend only using the workouts twice per week for the sake of running. It's your call.
It is a 3x5 program 3 times per week. Heavy weight (it's relative) for 5 reps and less increases myofibrillar hypertrophy opposed to sarcoplastic hypertrophy (look it up). Low reps also stimulates adaptations in your Central Nervous System which is the most important thing for runners. You literally teach your body to use the dormant fast twitch muscles that you never made it use, before you gain a single ounce of muscle.
http://forum.bodybuilding.com/showthread.php?t=115169981&highlight=myofibrillar
People trying to gain mass for looks usually lift in the 6-10 rep range.
There are literally hundreds of articles on the internet about this stuff so start searching.
Also running to burn up calories keeps you from gaining mass, which I have no doubt that you do already.
lol lol lol lol wrote:
There is no evidence supporting the notion that you can selectively create different "kinds" of hypertrophy.
Oh really?
So I guess that this:
http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/hale6.htmthis:
http://www.trainwiser.com/f109/sarcoplasmic-hypertrophy-rep-range-5284/this:
http://tnation.t-nation.com/free_online_forum/sports_body_training_performance_bodybuilding/bbing_and_sarcoplasmic_hypertrophyand every other link I found on the first page of a google search were just made up without any evidence. Maybe you should tell them that.