As Ronnie famously said, "Everybody wanna be a bodybuilder, but don't nobody want to do a 2-7 second eccentric and lengthened partials with pencilneck weight!"
@@owenjones795and also hundreds of bodybuilders trained like that they were all huge in the science based guys we're not any bigger if anything slightly smaller
“Gotta pick the wife and daughter in an hour” *1:15** hour video* The act of Horsecocking massive loads has curved space and time for optimal hypertrophy, videography and fatherhood. HOLY BUCKETS!
> 5:42 pauses video at 15 seconds, goes off for 8 minutes > 14:01 resumes video > 14:09 decides to start video over again > 14:25 "I'm gonna stop right there", pauses video again at 15 seconds 🤣
@@dune7824In every one of his exercise scientist critique videos he says that the eccentric portion of the lift is the most hypertrophic… yet here he is saying otherwise
@@Just_That_Guy910 The speed isn't what causes the hypertrophy, it's simply actually doing it. Maybe slowing down forces you to actually go to the full stretched position. I personally think it's more fatiguing so I don't do slow eccentrics.
@@Just_That_Guy910 yes, doing the eccentric is what builds the muscle. you can do eccentric part fast as long as you're controlling it and not just dropping it when you reach the top of the movement. thats why the slow eccentric: to make sure you are not dropping the weight and reduce injury risk but you can do fast controlled eccentric
59:58 Nippard totally back tracked on his back tier list after Dr Density pointed out how absurd it was that an ultra stable cable twist is superior to a barbell row
honestly NIppard is a good guy, Eugene Teo is also good. Dr Mike is dogshit though, and he's giving the other science based guys a bad name. (Milo is pretty bad too.) He's giving all these shitty reason to go slow, but the main reason not to is becaue you have to use less weight which means less tension which means less gains. The other crap he goes on about is ROM, but when he does leg press for example and goes completely duck footed and knees way out to the side, buttwink etc, those extra 2 inches you get from doing that stuff is doing everything you can to get deeper without actually elongating the target muscle, oh yeah, and you also have to strip off weight to get down there. Honestly the only good advice you see from RP is generic stuff that everyone says, everything that is unique to RP is bad. (edit: 55:50, it's even worse than that, he stops the set with 1-2 RIR of mechanical failure) Nippard should focus his attention on the shit advice they give. Science should self-correct, he needs to clean his own house.
I cant stand Mike. Not even with just what he says, maybe I'm just being a dick but the creepy super villian way he talks with all the weird ass sexual jokes that never land just bugs me out
We don't really know these guys. The horse is just such a nice guy. But, yea Mike and Milo are sketch for sure, and real science (intellectualism/academia) would clean its own house.
Everyone with any mass knows Dr. Density was right, including Nippard. He's just trying to milk pencilnecks for their time with non-stop new content. He ran out of cable angles to push, it seems, and now he's circling back to just horsing heavy weights. But, no doubt, in a week or so he'll push some new EMG study on soccer moms that says your shoulder activation is 105% higher by some crazy new cable technique.
Thats it’s exactly. It’s all just content milking. Nippard and Dr Mike built their physiques lifting bro style, and now peddle pencil-neckery for views
Mike Isratel also says in evry second Video that his way ibuilds the most muscle. And he always ties it wwith science. He never shows a study but he always says that is what the science says. 😂
I'm glad to see what Jeff is saying. In the end, it always gave me the impression that the super specific science lifting techniques and approach really only matter if you're a top 5% world class lifter trying to squeeze the final 2% extra muscle mass out of your workout. But if there's a foundation for all people training, it's THE MINDSET. If you don't have that, you don't have anything
maaaaaybe for bodybuilders, but if you look at the top 5% powerlifters and strongman competitors, they're mostly just doing all the bread and butter bigass compounds/sport specific moves. They don't waste their time with these itty bitty tweaks.
@@Nebulaoblivion Jeff has always made those kinds of videos for people who are advanced, though. All his fundamentals and powerbuilding programs are mostly pure barbell work. He's never told people not to do barbell workouts, and that's what a lot of people don't seem to recognize.
My issue with Jeff’s post is he doesn’t address the flaws in his community. The weak studies paraded as gospel, the fallible appeals to authority, the lack of policing towards bullshitters. Science based lifting would do better if it stuck to the basics
I like what Bald Omni-Man says about lifting tempo: "Control the weight, but don't be a try-hard." Control the weight and don't flail around, go through a decent range of active tension, and progress over time. Tension is still the main driver within a set, and progressive overload the main driver over time. Dr. Mike has made up half the stuff he says. He's not evidence-based at all anymore. The evidence is pretty limited, guys who are actual science communicators like Eric Helms are much more reliable. I think after training with Mike recently, this video is Jeff's Canadian-nice way of distancing himself from Dr. Mike. Jeff built the majority of his physique doing big compound movements and getting stronger on isolations. Bread and butter stuff.
Not sure what they’re like these days but I bought Jeff’s ppl program a few years ago and the workouts included almost every staple mass builder (squat, bench, deadlift, OHP, RDL’s etc) with maybe 2-3 new gen science based bullshit movements sprinkled in throughout the week that could be substituted with more basic movements if wanted, I also got emails every few months requesting feedback which tells me he actually wants the people buying his programs to get results. Not gonna act like I know him at all behind the scenes but I get the impression that Jeff rides the science based wave when it comes to engagement on instagram, UA-cam etc but can’t morally justify selling something he knows doesn’t work.
holy buckets with jeff nipples recognising the power of horsecockery PLUS eugene teo singing the praises of the behind the back deadlift.. it seems that doctor density, mr sizzle, mr spice is having a serious IMPACT on the fitness community
Teo used to powerlift and he was bigger then, go figure. And he gets goofed on for putting on the wrist cuff to do 15lb cable lateral raises, surely his (and anyones) grip can't be a limiting factor at that much weight. It just goes to show the science based lifting community is geared towards stringbeans and novice lifters or guys who watch UA-cam videos 7 days a week and workout for 2
at 27:00 major horsecawk delhagen has a slight misconception about the bar graph. The difference is insignificant not because it's small, it's insiginificant because it is smaller than the possible error in measurement. Meaning that the slightly higher bar graph could also be slightly lower or exaclty the same but we have no idea. So that difference is in fact completely fake and you should look at the two bars as being equal. This is like a statistics meme so it feels kind of unintuitive.
Yes it was funny, and his mental math part was funny. He almost had a point that if the study was 4 years it could be more but as you said it could be because of chance. I don't actually believe that 2 different methods can have the same results but it depends on the time frame.
„That difference is in fact completely fake“. No it‘s not, it just - as you said - might be random due to measurement error or interindividual differences leading to high stds. It MIGHT. But it might also be a real difference regardless of statistical significance. Feels like the bell curve meme…
@@M7Bue I'm not sure I understand. You're saying the difference can be considered real even if it's within error? Or that it might be real and we don't know because it's within error? The latter is what I said above.
@@vegbetle i was just bothered with your sentence that it is fake which is clearly misleading. There is a difference, but indeed we don‘t know if it is real / meaningful. So i wouldn‘t consider the difference real but saying there is none is also not correct.
If you notice all of the things that “work” in Jeff’s table were shown to have scientific efficacy on the basis of quite recent studies. There is a well-known replication crisis in all scientific literature. And I would wager that a good portion of the evidence supposedly supporting such practices, would not stand up over the long-term if replication was sought.
Especially if they replicated the studies with intermediate lifters as opposed to newbie middle aged women (like the newest lengthened partials ones Jeff did that used intermediate lifters and showed they are equivalent to regular lifts).
@@lelsewherelelsewhere9435 If I recall correctly with this new Jeff's study both groups built like 10% muscles with his 8 or 12 weeks of study. Why he won't repeat this study for a year with all of his muscle groups and become new ms olympia? Its ridiculous to this its even possible...
Preach, Rick! I feel like Dr. Mike doesn’t want to actually debate this training philosophy with you. I’d love to see a vid with both of you making your points clear to each other
@@SheepWaveMeByeBye yeah but these guys aren't top scientists spending years doing vigorous research, they're body builders trying to sell their programmes to impressionable newbies
Professor Horsecock, just a small comment on “significance” here. In scientific terms, “not significantly different” does not mean that the difference is too small to be biologically relevant. It means that the measured difference is more likely to have arose from random variance than an actual effect. So the small differences in the bar graphs at 29:55 were more likely due to random chance than the shorter negative actually being beneficial.
What I would pay to see these guys collab and do a lifting session together! Just light hearted, take each other through science based workouts and horsecock workouts. It’s the conclusion we need to this series
WARNING - PENCILNECK COMMENT Eric - very small differences between graphs are utterly meaningless if the extent of difference is not significant enough . The reason being that if you repeat the study then there will be differences each time and in different directions, and overall that means there's basically no difference. That's why scientists stress the point of these tiny differences as being insignificant. If one approach was truly superior to the other then there would be a big enough effect that can't be down to errors and you would see much more consistent findings. From what I can see, as a medical doctor, most hypertrophy research suggests science based approaches can be disregarded apart from overall effort, and arguably a decent stretch at the start. I find your sceptical approach to exercise science very refreshing, and love the points you make about bringing gusto to what you enjoy doing above all else but jumping on a tiny difference between graphs is a bit of an own goal as it just undermines the good points you made
signal-to-noise issue. essentially these 'science-based lifters' are doing the same thing paranormal investigators do: convincing themselves there's a message in the static.
I did Jeff’s power building program with all the optimized baloney and saw almost no improvement on my PRs. I did everything to the T, including nutrition. Now I’m doing Wendlers 531 and am hoisting and heaving heavy loads with no issue ✨
I know someone who had a stroke last year. He can't do most free weight exercises, due to lack of balance. Bench pressing would probably kill him. He can't do skull crushers. He can't squat. Pretty much none of the 'basic' stuff. However most 'science based' exercises are perfectly doable, as they are mostly designed for perfect balance
This is the best video in the fitness industry 😂 the body always knows what it wants to strengthen. I found that simply standing and quieting down for a bit connects me to that intuition, and i end up constantly moving for like an hour. And sometimes i end up doing push things, sometime hinge or side bending things, crawling, etc. The body knows.
I've been watching your videos pretty regularly for about seven years (first was "Stay Natty Bros,") and for the only relevant background about me, my sole sport for a long time was running, until lifting looked like fun. I started "hybrid training" before there was a word for it; my collegiate kinesiology and athletic training friends said I was a "concurrent training athlete." Your videos did then, and just again today now made me excited about lifting--but even more so just training and improving at all. I really liked Jeff's video, but yours here got me fired up, again. I don't comment a ton online, but I wanted to drop my pennies in the basket and as a stranger say you're a positive influence and the man.
2:11 Theoretically you could do the 1 hour non stop dumbbell training and split up the muscle groups into different days and increase the weight accordingly. 1 hour nonstop curls, 1 hour chest press, 1 hour squats etc etc.
As a guitarist/songwriter, I really relate to having your GUSTO taken over by the strings/keys/skins. Much as I love the gym, it’s way easier to lose track of time on an instrument
In this video we see two completely different people. One trains scientifically based, always speaks facts and logic, provides you with the most effecient training methods. The other is Jeff Nippard.
RICK , I have never bought any UA-camrs influencer merch before and I’m still not gonna but I did for a moment say ooo that pistachio shirt is gorgeous
What nobody understands about Dr. Ricky is that he is ABSOLUTELY a science-based lifter. He specializes in the PSYCHOLOGY of lifting: the best programs reliably produce dopamine. Others preach optimal biomechanics while Dr Density preaches optimal endorphins. Nobody does it better than he does.
But GVS is ‘science based’ as is anyone who uses evidence to learn and understand bodybuilding. This whole argument is nonsense. We’re not working out based on superstition, there are ways to train that produce results and we use those results to guide and make training choices. That is science…
@@benmjt what you described as science also describes anecdotal evidence broski. Surprised you chose gvs as the example of science based here with lyle in the line up lol, and at the end of the day, this debate comes down to semantics more than anything, just as with most discussions regarding fitness on yt
So true, lately mike and jeff have been releasing videos saying more sets up to like 30 sets a week creates more growth and going to failure makes more growth. So wtf, its about managing fatigue i guess. So just take a day off when you cant lift as heavy and eat more carbs for a day. I use the rp hypertrophy app to organize lifts and i just go to failure almost everylift instead of the rir bs. Now going into week 5 to full failure next week. Planning on 3 days rest prior with some carbs then i plan to go full failure on everything and beyond. I expect to go till the leg press is stuck down, etc. Its all mindset
You are totally right Ricky. Mike is feeling the wind changing of direction and now he back-pedals to try to stay relevant. It is not a genuine and honest change of opinion.
So true about enthusiasm for training. Was doing the tempo thing and was...OK. But only after I got back into strength training did I truly get back my...mojo! First week and a half put on 7kg.
And then Jeff’s next video will be a Delt exercise tier list because he found some random study that says you can get 5% more gains by doing some random stupid thing. And the study was on 30 non trained people over 6 weeks. The number one exercise will be upside down cable laterals.
Brian Alsruhe talks about doing what excites you as far as assistance exercises goes. He hates straights sets and reps so make all of his assistance some sort of challenge basically, an emom or Tabata. He’s super strong!
No, he did. Ricky just talked over his explanation with tremendous gusto and heart. Jeff said that his tier list was for advanced lifters who have already finished the bread and butter classics in their routine and wanted extra activation, basically "Do these lifts as icing on the cake because they have the most stability, which is needed after you've 🐎🐔'd tremendous loads".
You should make a video on what one should do for rehab if they tweaked their back or herniated a disc deadlifting and they can't do bentover rows or deadlifts heavy.
Bro every single time I've injured myself I've noticed the same thing. I gotta sit back and evaluate what I'm doing because I have no other choice and I always end up stronger than I was before. Minus a few tweaks here and there but whatever. Adaptability is the mother of all consistency
The 'significant' difference stems from accounting for variability amongst individuals. They cant let the exact same dude do 2 methods in the same point in time with the same muscle at the same progression point. That's why. You can't claim something grows more muscle if you did not account for variability. Thanks for listening to my TedTalk
15:40 i used to spend way to long and always go way too hard too often and i never got anywhere but injured. More is more didnt work for me. As soon as i started being more specific with my workouts, spending only the time necessary and listening to my body when to back off, i had a growth spurt. This isnt to say that i didnt go hard most of the time, i did, but more is more just isnt true, over training is a reality, just people like to say they overtrained as an excuse their lack of effort.
I don't think anybody who has watched jeff nippard or dr mike ever thought that the message they were pushing was that science based means lifting hard and controlling volume, jeffs video was such a cop out the more you look into it
Jeff's literally just back-pedalling though, "When I put an exercise in S tier, it doesn't mean that I think it's better than the barbell row, which is in B tier". Well why is he rating it B and not S then. He's just chatting shit.
Neural based comes from the mind set. The nervous system is king and dominates the muscles in either weakness or strength, and again the mindset is King of the nervous system which dominates muscle. Science based muscle-ology puts the cart before THE HORSE. and that's why it's bs in so many ways. Put THE HORSE BEFORE THE CART with mindset>> nervous system>> muscle. Horsekokery is mainly neural.Training the nervous system.The muscle response from the command center (mind>> nervous system) responds to the density of thought(mindset) or lack. of it. Guru Horse Meister Boogenthruster has been kinda saying this for years and it's correct.
As Ronnie famously said, "Everybody wanna be a bodybuilder, but don't nobody want to do a 2-7 second eccentric and lengthened partials with pencilneck weight!"
😂😂
Right! Everyone wants to look like Ronnie, but no body wants to do the 2-7 second eccentric and lengthened partials with pencilneck weights.
Ironically Ronnie did do lengthened partials for a lot of his exercises lol. But no eccentric
@@owenjones795and also hundreds of bodybuilders trained like that they were all huge in the science based guys we're not any bigger if anything slightly smaller
English
Don't worry Dr. Density, I set the speed to 1.25 so you could pick up mama and the daughter on time 🤝
LOL!
Brilliant
Big brain
The legendary friendship between Dr. Density and Mc Beefcake
@Mc_Beeefcake, your insight is Nobel Prize worthy. Thank you for your scientific discovery. I was worried that the Stick was going to be late!
I copped the avengers time stone for Stick Von Clydesdale
"I have to pick up mama in an hour" ....proceeds to make a 1 hour and 15 minute video.
He's helping her train her patience by providing extra reps
My first thought too lol
Mama can wait
🤣
She loves him. She don’t care😂
WHAT THE FRICK. Are my eyes deceiving me or is there a literal CLYDESDALE speaking the English language on my screen!?!? HOLY BUCKETS
first time UA-cam's new quick lookup feature was useful to me 😂
Dude I’m seeing the same thing. AI has gotten crazy
they say he used to be human
I don't buy it tho
@@adokceyou don’t belong here if you didn’t already know what one was🤣
stop simping its sick
“Gotta pick the wife and daughter in an hour”
*1:15** hour video*
The act of Horsecocking massive loads has curved space and time for optimal hypertrophy, videography and fatherhood. HOLY BUCKETS!
"You were supposed to be here an hour ago!"
"But MaaAAaaa, I was chit-chatting with the Fellas!"
> 5:42 pauses video at 15 seconds, goes off for 8 minutes
> 14:01 resumes video
> 14:09 decides to start video over again
> 14:25 "I'm gonna stop right there", pauses video again at 15 seconds
🤣
Sometimes it feels like a "pov of Erics therapist" video
"Confessions with Boogz"
14 minutes in, video has yet to start, a certified classic
Press play bro
@ oh shit thanks man, got it started now
Eric, could you release a video edited in Nippards hyper-smooth style?
I want to see him respond in an unhinged hour-long rant
Yes. I want this. Jeff Nippard doing a video in Eric's style would be a mesmerizing spectacle.
This is how their collab should happen one day. It would be a perfect April Fool's project.
bruhhh, he will never
Holy buckets it really would@@JackgarPrime
10 minutes in and we are only 15 seconds into the watching Jeff's video, classic
Jeff's vid starts at 14:00, so Eric has really gotten his intro tight, succulent and efficient these days
Big intro from a big man. Go big or go home 🗣
16 minutes in and we've reached the 24 second mark 🗣
Certified density classic
Thanks for posting, I'm really looking forward to covering the first 3 minutes of Jeff's video with you Eric.
I like how Bugenhagen instinctively screams when he sees his own face
Even the Bugez fears the Bugez.
-Why do slow eccentrics?
“for mind muscle connection”
-Does it build more muscle?
“no”
Dr. Mike wtf ?
He said it reduces wear and tear due the slower, controlled ROM. If you can get the same gains with less wear and tear, that's a win long term.
@@dune7824In every one of his exercise scientist critique videos he says that the eccentric portion of the lift is the most hypertrophic… yet here he is saying otherwise
It doesn't build more muscle or even equal muscle it builds less
@@Just_That_Guy910 The speed isn't what causes the hypertrophy, it's simply actually doing it. Maybe slowing down forces you to actually go to the full stretched position. I personally think it's more fatiguing so I don't do slow eccentrics.
@@Just_That_Guy910 yes, doing the eccentric is what builds the muscle. you can do eccentric part fast as long as you're controlling it and not just dropping it when you reach the top of the movement. thats why the slow eccentric: to make sure you are not dropping the weight and reduce injury risk but you can do fast controlled eccentric
59:58 Nippard totally back tracked on his back tier list after Dr Density pointed out how absurd it was that an ultra stable cable twist is superior to a barbell row
Dr Mike contradicting himself as usual.
At least stick to your guns 😂 he’s losing all the respect
He's the real snake-oil salesmen.
((()))
@@a-m-g63people have been on his ass quite a lot recently I’ve seen a lot of videos of people digging at him
"Slow negatives were never my friend"
CONTACT A DOCTOR IF YOUR ECCENTRIC LASTS MORE THAN 4 HOURS!!!!11
only 4 hours?
Dr. Mike? No thanks. I rather contact someone who actually knows how to train people.
“Salmon, light blue, and a beautiful pistachio” 😭😭😭
Sounds like hes describing a fancy entree at a nice restaurant lol
Those were some nice shirts and some nice colors lets be fr
WTF!?
It's pink, blue and beige!!!
That pistachio is fire
Is this absolute legend gonna curl the entire video??? I was listening in the car and didn't even realize. What a champion.
Erica bugenhagen has the best comment section on UA-cam. lmao
Best part of jeff's comment section is all the horse c0ck comments as well 😂
Eric*
Stop jinxing it
By far
Literally I was gonna say that scrolling for like last 5m
honestly NIppard is a good guy, Eugene Teo is also good. Dr Mike is dogshit though, and he's giving the other science based guys a bad name. (Milo is pretty bad too.) He's giving all these shitty reason to go slow, but the main reason not to is becaue you have to use less weight which means less tension which means less gains.
The other crap he goes on about is ROM, but when he does leg press for example and goes completely duck footed and knees way out to the side, buttwink etc, those extra 2 inches you get from doing that stuff is doing everything you can to get deeper without actually elongating the target muscle, oh yeah, and you also have to strip off weight to get down there.
Honestly the only good advice you see from RP is generic stuff that everyone says, everything that is unique to RP is bad. (edit: 55:50, it's even worse than that, he stops the set with 1-2 RIR of mechanical failure)
Nippard should focus his attention on the shit advice they give. Science should self-correct, he needs to clean his own house.
Based take
Milo is a real one-trick pony. Basically: 'lengthened parrrtials'. The end.
I cant stand Mike. Not even with just what he says, maybe I'm just being a dick but the creepy super villian way he talks with all the weird ass sexual jokes that never land just bugs me out
👏👏👏
We don't really know these guys. The horse is just such a nice guy. But, yea Mike and Milo are sketch for sure, and real science (intellectualism/academia) would clean its own house.
We want a collab. We want to see jeff training in an horsecockery manner
YES
16 minutes in, and we're 28 seconds into Jeffs video lol.
The Jeff Nippard arc came full circle when his book has the biggest chapter being about MINDSET!
Which book are we talking about?
@@HansWorst7his new book will be released on Amazon on Dec 31.
Everyone with any mass knows Dr. Density was right, including Nippard. He's just trying to milk pencilnecks for their time with non-stop new content. He ran out of cable angles to push, it seems, and now he's circling back to just horsing heavy weights. But, no doubt, in a week or so he'll push some new EMG study on soccer moms that says your shoulder activation is 105% higher by some crazy new cable technique.
Perfect way of putting it haha
Thats it’s exactly. It’s all just content milking. Nippard and Dr Mike built their physiques lifting bro style, and now peddle pencil-neckery for views
Nailed it
And people without mass get no opinion
Lmao
Mike Isratel also says in evry second Video that his way ibuilds the most muscle. And he always ties it wwith science. He never shows a study but he always says that is what the science says. 😂
Well he's a doctor so ofc it's scientific
And he does it in the most passive aggressive tone, "I'm so freaking smart and you're a complete moron."
And of course he’s bigger and stronger than Mike Mentzer
@@jordandrumb he’s a jew so yeah
Dr Mike’s accolades speak for themselves 🤫
Most people are so immersed in Dr.Density’s gainz and content they didn’t even realize this vid was filmed in front of a movie theater screen
I'm glad to see what Jeff is saying. In the end, it always gave me the impression that the super specific science lifting techniques and approach really only matter if you're a top 5% world class lifter trying to squeeze the final 2% extra muscle mass out of your workout.
But if there's a foundation for all people training, it's THE MINDSET. If you don't have that, you don't have anything
maaaaaybe for bodybuilders, but if you look at the top 5% powerlifters and strongman competitors, they're mostly just doing all the bread and butter bigass compounds/sport specific moves. They don't waste their time with these itty bitty tweaks.
@@Nebulaoblivionthey definitely focus on their own minutia, they're just not solely focused on hypertrophy.
@@Nebulaoblivion Jeff has always made those kinds of videos for people who are advanced, though. All his fundamentals and powerbuilding programs are mostly pure barbell work. He's never told people not to do barbell workouts, and that's what a lot of people don't seem to recognize.
Video from Renaissance Periodization, title of video “Slow eccentric for most gains”: ua-cam.com/users/shortsx1w_Iijmzcg?si=MFzzjdjNLojslIPz
Boosting so Eric can see it.
19:24 Mike Israetel in all his video 🤣🤣
My issue with Jeff’s post is he doesn’t address the flaws in his community. The weak studies paraded as gospel, the fallible appeals to authority, the lack of policing towards bullshitters. Science based lifting would do better if it stuck to the basics
What is this exact video then?
Are you dumb? That video of Jeff is exactly that
@ jeffs video addresses the application of science not the limitations of the science and the meta of the science based community
This. Imagine being part of a field that takes Milo Wolf seriously.
Why is he responsible to address criticisms at other people lmao
Do a collab with Jeff.
It is time.
Gay
I liked both these comments
I like what Bald Omni-Man says about lifting tempo: "Control the weight, but don't be a try-hard."
Control the weight and don't flail around, go through a decent range of active tension, and progress over time. Tension is still the main driver within a set, and progressive overload the main driver over time.
Dr. Mike has made up half the stuff he says. He's not evidence-based at all anymore. The evidence is pretty limited, guys who are actual science communicators like Eric Helms are much more reliable. I think after training with Mike recently, this video is Jeff's Canadian-nice way of distancing himself from Dr. Mike.
Jeff built the majority of his physique doing big compound movements and getting stronger on isolations. Bread and butter stuff.
Mike never was, people are just waking up to it now
Not sure what they’re like these days but I bought Jeff’s ppl program a few years ago and the workouts included almost every staple mass builder (squat, bench, deadlift, OHP, RDL’s etc) with maybe 2-3 new gen science based bullshit movements sprinkled in throughout the week that could be substituted with more basic movements if wanted, I also got emails every few months requesting feedback which tells me he actually wants the people buying his programs to get results. Not gonna act like I know him at all behind the scenes but I get the impression that Jeff rides the science based wave when it comes to engagement on instagram, UA-cam etc but can’t morally justify selling something he knows doesn’t work.
holy buckets with jeff nipples recognising the power of horsecockery PLUS eugene teo singing the praises of the behind the back deadlift.. it seems that doctor density, mr sizzle, mr spice is having a serious IMPACT on the fitness community
Eugene Teo lol
Only 2 years ago he was telling his audience to give up barbells because they’re not optimal 🤦🏻♂️
@@persianwingman And yet here he is loving zercher squats and btb deads... maybe he's been sucking down some Rickys Rotund raspberry?
@@persianwingman he must have been sucking down the rickys rotund raspberry
Pencil neckery on the decline hopefully 🙏
Teo used to powerlift and he was bigger then, go figure. And he gets goofed on for putting on the wrist cuff to do 15lb cable lateral raises, surely his (and anyones) grip can't be a limiting factor at that much weight. It just goes to show the science based lifting community is geared towards stringbeans and novice lifters or guys who watch UA-cam videos 7 days a week and workout for 2
You can tell he doesn’t like Dr Mike and I can’t blame him.
restarts video and pauses the exact same place he restarted it from. Its like a cross between an SNL skit and a movie directed by christopher nolan.
THANK YOU FOR BEIN MY FRIENDDDD
33:48 the comedic gold of mr beefy's bark. S tier plus content stick
Though the saamee thing haha
Happy to skip my aunt's funeral to catch some talks by Mr. Johnny Horsecock
There’s no ‘optimal’ way to do anything in life you just gotta fucking do it
Frickin' Shia LaBeouf over here
@ we all got a lil LaBeouf in us
Sharp as a fuckin' cue ball this guy
Wise words
As someone who overthinks things, I will unironically write this on my wall or something.
at 27:00 major horsecawk delhagen has a slight misconception about the bar graph. The difference is insignificant not because it's small, it's insiginificant because it is smaller than the possible error in measurement. Meaning that the slightly higher bar graph could also be slightly lower or exaclty the same but we have no idea. So that difference is in fact completely fake and you should look at the two bars as being equal. This is like a statistics meme so it feels kind of unintuitive.
Yes it was funny, and his mental math part was funny.
He almost had a point that if the study was 4 years it could be more but as you said it could be because of chance.
I don't actually believe that 2 different methods can have the same results but it depends on the time frame.
„That difference is in fact completely fake“. No it‘s not, it just - as you said - might be random due to measurement error or interindividual differences leading to high stds. It MIGHT. But it might also be a real difference regardless of statistical significance. Feels like the bell curve meme…
@@M7Bue I'm not sure I understand. You're saying the difference can be considered real even if it's within error? Or that it might be real and we don't know because it's within error? The latter is what I said above.
@@vegbetle i was just bothered with your sentence that it is fake which is clearly misleading. There is a difference, but indeed we don‘t know if it is real / meaningful. So i wouldn‘t consider the difference real but saying there is none is also not correct.
@@M7Bue oh ok thanks for the clarification
If you notice all of the things that “work” in Jeff’s table were shown to have scientific efficacy on the basis of quite recent studies. There is a well-known replication crisis in all scientific literature. And I would wager that a good portion of the evidence supposedly supporting such practices, would not stand up over the long-term if replication was sought.
Especially if they replicated the studies with intermediate lifters as opposed to newbie middle aged women (like the newest lengthened partials ones Jeff did that used intermediate lifters and showed they are equivalent to regular lifts).
@@lelsewherelelsewhere9435 If I recall correctly with this new Jeff's study both groups built like 10% muscles with his 8 or 12 weeks of study. Why he won't repeat this study for a year with all of his muscle groups and become new ms olympia? Its ridiculous to this its even possible...
Almost a month out of the gym. Bronchitis and slight pneumonia. This sucks. If I was weak before, now I really am a daffodil
THAT'S S TIER THAT'S S TIER?!?!?!? Goddamn Ricky sticky you crack me up every time, we need a compilation music video of this shit
By the way fellas that dumbell hes hoisting around is 80lbs
Preach, Rick! I feel like Dr. Mike doesn’t want to actually debate this training philosophy with you. I’d love to see a vid with both of you making your points clear to each other
The anxiety and overthinking takes it’s toll on the central nervous system and definitely ruins any mind muscle connection.
It’s mostly an excuse to not train that hard. A certain type of person likes feeling smarter than others by overcomplicating the simple
I must say I was proud of Jeff after his video and extremely curious to know your take on it. I think we can agree you were right the whole time Rick.
They call themselves "scientist" but talk and act like politicians lmao
That's every notable scientist.
That's what the top scientists do.
@@SheepWaveMeByeBye yeah but these guys aren't top scientists spending years doing vigorous research, they're body builders trying to sell their programmes to impressionable newbies
Professor Horsecock, just a small comment on “significance” here. In scientific terms, “not significantly different” does not mean that the difference is too small to be biologically relevant. It means that the measured difference is more likely to have arose from random variance than an actual effect. So the small differences in the bar graphs at 29:55 were more likely due to random chance than the shorter negative actually being beneficial.
"the rich just want to keep getting richer" - based comrade Boogs
What I would pay to see these guys collab and do a lifting session together! Just light hearted, take each other through science based workouts and horsecock workouts. It’s the conclusion we need to this series
Sensei Stick I love that you got some drums. I got new speakers for my synth for Xmas and it's a great way to awaken the mindset!!
We need a neck harness drum session workout
Also a collab with Bill Burr who is a drumming and lifting enthusiast
WARNING - PENCILNECK COMMENT
Eric - very small differences between graphs are utterly meaningless if the extent of difference is not significant enough .
The reason being that if you repeat the study then there will be differences each time and in different directions, and overall that means there's basically no difference. That's why scientists stress the point of these tiny differences as being insignificant. If one approach was truly superior to the other then there would be a big enough effect that can't be down to errors and you would see much more consistent findings. From what I can see, as a medical doctor, most hypertrophy research suggests science based approaches can be disregarded apart from overall effort, and arguably a decent stretch at the start.
I find your sceptical approach to exercise science very refreshing, and love the points you make about bringing gusto to what you enjoy doing above all else but jumping on a tiny difference between graphs is a bit of an own goal as it just undermines the good points you made
signal-to-noise issue. essentially these 'science-based lifters' are doing the same thing paranormal investigators do: convincing themselves there's a message in the static.
I did Jeff’s power building program with all the optimized baloney and saw almost no improvement on my PRs. I did everything to the T, including nutrition. Now I’m doing Wendlers 531 and am hoisting and heaving heavy loads with no issue ✨
I know someone who had a stroke last year. He can't do most free weight exercises, due to lack of balance. Bench pressing would probably kill him. He can't do skull crushers. He can't squat. Pretty much none of the 'basic' stuff.
However most 'science based' exercises are perfectly doable, as they are mostly designed for perfect balance
This is the best video in the fitness industry 😂 the body always knows what it wants to strengthen. I found that simply standing and quieting down for a bit connects me to that intuition, and i end up constantly moving for like an hour. And sometimes i end up doing push things, sometime hinge or side bending things, crawling, etc. The body knows.
I've been watching your videos pretty regularly for about seven years (first was "Stay Natty Bros,") and for the only relevant background about me, my sole sport for a long time was running, until lifting looked like fun. I started "hybrid training" before there was a word for it; my collegiate kinesiology and athletic training friends said I was a "concurrent training athlete." Your videos did then, and just again today now made me excited about lifting--but even more so just training and improving at all. I really liked Jeff's video, but yours here got me fired up, again. I don't comment a ton online, but I wanted to drop my pennies in the basket and as a stranger say you're a positive influence and the man.
2:11 Theoretically you could do the 1 hour non stop dumbbell training and split up the muscle groups into different days and increase the weight accordingly. 1 hour nonstop curls, 1 hour chest press, 1 hour squats etc etc.
As a guitarist/songwriter, I really relate to having your GUSTO taken over by the strings/keys/skins. Much as I love the gym, it’s way easier to lose track of time on an instrument
Jeff really is a stand up guy. I really like him and his morals, always wanting to help. He really is a good guy
Coffee and dr. Density, I’m ready for my first lesson 🤓
❤❤❤ 3 days into mini cut. Thanks for keeping my mind busy
36:45 i am fucking crying. him losing his mind with the distant voice out of sight
In this video we see two completely different people. One trains scientifically based, always speaks facts and logic, provides you with the most effecient training methods.
The other is Jeff Nippard.
RICK , I have never bought any UA-camrs influencer merch before and I’m still not gonna but I did for a moment say ooo that pistachio shirt is gorgeous
What nobody understands about Dr. Ricky is that he is ABSOLUTELY a science-based lifter. He specializes in the PSYCHOLOGY of lifting: the best programs reliably produce dopamine. Others preach optimal biomechanics while Dr Density preaches optimal endorphins. Nobody does it better than he does.
Are we blasting or cruising? Looks leaner
I would recommend GVS, Solomon Nelson, Lyle McDonald, Natural Hypertrophy for viewpoints counter to the “science” based community
Basement bodybuilding also an absolute gem who should be in this group
@@rockyevans1584 very true
GVS is a certified horsecocker he calls out bullshit and trains hard like a mfer. I love that guy.
But GVS is ‘science based’ as is anyone who uses evidence to learn and understand bodybuilding. This whole argument is nonsense. We’re not working out based on superstition, there are ways to train that produce results and we use those results to guide and make training choices. That is science…
@@benmjt what you described as science also describes anecdotal evidence broski. Surprised you chose gvs as the example of science based here with lyle in the line up lol, and at the end of the day, this debate comes down to semantics more than anything, just as with most discussions regarding fitness on yt
So true, lately mike and jeff have been releasing videos saying more sets up to like 30 sets a week creates more growth and going to failure makes more growth. So wtf, its about managing fatigue i guess. So just take a day off when you cant lift as heavy and eat more carbs for a day. I use the rp hypertrophy app to organize lifts and i just go to failure almost everylift instead of the rir bs. Now going into week 5 to full failure next week. Planning on 3 days rest prior with some carbs then i plan to go full failure on everything and beyond. I expect to go till the leg press is stuck down, etc. Its all mindset
You are totally right Ricky. Mike is feeling the wind changing of direction and now he back-pedals to try to stay relevant. It is not a genuine and honest change of opinion.
So true about enthusiasm for training. Was doing the tempo thing and was...OK. But only after I got back into strength training did I truly get back my...mojo! First week and a half put on 7kg.
I’m trying to become more Ox Like. Any tips?
Fanny pack full of intra-workout snacks
Thank you for being a friend Rick
Ricky is moving into a whole new world: pre-exhausting for double-time metal drumming sticking patterns.
Hey Dr. Density, are you still natty? I'm quite curious, and i'm not sure why but i NEED answers.
And then Jeff’s next video will be a Delt exercise tier list because he found some random study that says you can get 5% more gains by doing some random stupid thing. And the study was on 30 non trained people over 6 weeks. The number one exercise will be upside down cable laterals.
This vid just gave me a massive mood boost! Thanks
BUT ERIC i got the accumobility roller, can you explain or show how to get the most amazing cracks out of your back with this thing
Ayyyy TV talk with Dr. Density. What a blessing 😊
Thank you for being my friend
Right arm- 5557 reps
Left arm- 48 reps
I knew this was coming. Dr. Density never disapoints!
Brian Alsruhe talks about doing what excites you as far as assistance exercises goes. He hates straights sets and reps so make all of his assistance some sort of challenge basically, an emom or Tabata. He’s super strong!
Jeff: My tier list doesn't mean what people thought it meant.
Also Jeff: *doesn't explain what it actually meant*
No, he did. Ricky just talked over his explanation with tremendous gusto and heart.
Jeff said that his tier list was for advanced lifters who have already finished the bread and butter classics in their routine and wanted extra activation, basically "Do these lifts as icing on the cake because they have the most stability, which is needed after you've 🐎🐔'd tremendous loads".
Dr Mass lectures are simply the best
Watching Eric ramble definitely makes me even more proud to be a rant n raver
What a horse, what a majestic horse doing 2-second reps. Proud of you. True science-based horse right here.
Best way to end the year, hours plus HORSECOCK VIDEOOO
Cable one arm rows made me think unilateral work for back is pretty mid, that was before I tried heavy cheat dumbbell rows though
You should make a video on what one should do for rehab if they tweaked their back or herniated a disc deadlifting and they can't do bentover rows or deadlifts heavy.
Double bass drumming?!? What kinda tempos we talkin' ?!? And what pedals are you using?! I'm a Speedcobra guy myself 🥁
Drums: Rick The Stick!
Guitar: Kevin Frasard
Vocals: Phil Anselmo
Bass: Steve Digiorgio
Name the band...
@vivaelpibe5604 Horsecawkery
Bro every single time I've injured myself I've noticed the same thing. I gotta sit back and evaluate what I'm doing because I have no other choice and I always end up stronger than I was before. Minus a few tweaks here and there but whatever. Adaptability is the mother of all consistency
thank you for being my friend the video
The 'significant' difference stems from accounting for variability amongst individuals. They cant let the exact same dude do 2 methods in the same point in time with the same muscle at the same progression point. That's why. You can't claim something grows more muscle if you did not account for variability. Thanks for listening to my TedTalk
15:40 i used to spend way to long and always go way too hard too often and i never got anywhere but injured.
More is more didnt work for me.
As soon as i started being more specific with my workouts, spending only the time necessary and listening to my body when to back off, i had a growth spurt. This isnt to say that i didnt go hard most of the time, i did, but more is more just isnt true, over training is a reality, just people like to say they overtrained as an excuse their lack of effort.
I don't think anybody who has watched jeff nippard or dr mike ever thought that the message they were pushing was that science based means lifting hard and controlling volume, jeffs video was such a cop out the more you look into it
Jeff's literally just back-pedalling though, "When I put an exercise in S tier, it doesn't mean that I think it's better than the barbell row, which is in B tier". Well why is he rating it B and not S then. He's just chatting shit.
Yeah he is absolutely back pedaling. And his cult followers are eating it up. Jeff is not a good person.
Neural based comes from the mind set. The nervous system is king and dominates the muscles in either weakness or strength, and again the mindset is King of the nervous system which dominates muscle. Science based muscle-ology puts the cart before THE HORSE. and that's why it's bs in so many ways. Put THE HORSE BEFORE THE CART with mindset>> nervous system>> muscle. Horsekokery is mainly neural.Training the nervous system.The muscle response from the command center (mind>> nervous system) responds to the density of thought(mindset) or lack.
of it. Guru Horse Meister Boogenthruster has been kinda saying this for years and it's correct.
It’s nice knowing that even the Stick has shit workouts sometimes, he might be human after all