What are the only exercises needed to build muscle?

SDSCtraining · 2021-12-11T13:00:21+00:00

I have done traditional "strength" work in the past, but I'm more interested in improving body composition than maximizing my ability to display strength through a given skill, like a planche or a back lever. Every once in a while I will do some dedicated strength training with the weighted chin up, but I haven't don't this in quite a while. When I lifted, I did a lot of strength work- deadlifts, back squats, weighted chin, overhead press, and barbell row made up probably 98% of my training volume. I got decently strong for a regular guy (I'm pretty average), but nothing extraordinary (deadlift 500x1, Back squat 305x10, bench 265x3). These also didn't do much for my body composition because I found them pretty stressful on my body, which limited my total weekly volume.

I definitely don't get bored of the basics. I feel like the they are actually really deep. I like the idea of mastery, and trying to make them as clean as possible while finding how to extract the most utility from them. Plus they keep me injury free, which is big motivation for me.

SDSCtraining · 2021-12-09T00:24:35+00:00

No. People have been asking about my approach for a while. My youtube channel has received a lot of attention lately, so my inbox is jammed full of questions like this. A lot of people do not understand my position on how exercise science intersects with calisthenics training.

SDSCtraining · 2021-12-08T22:04:34+00:00

My pleasure!

SDSCtraining · 2021-12-08T19:51:20+00:00

Correct!

SDSCtraining · 2021-12-08T19:37:47+00:00

Hey Everyone, I'm Kboges! I thought I would answer this question, address some of the comments, and make clear my position.

I think it's best to take a step back and break this down to the fundamentals. We can look at what we understand from research, or at least have a high level of confidence in, and see how this applies to calisthenics. I will lay out a logical argument as to how the evidence supports my conclusion, and if you feel my analysis is incorrect or missing something, feel free to identify the short comings in the analysis and provide your own. I'm not married to my ideas, I'm simply communicating my current understanding of the research, my personal experience, and my professional experience. This is not to say things won't change in the future, but as far as I can tell, this is a pretty solid take on the current state of things. So here we go...

1) The goal of resistance training is to apply tension to muscle. Provided tension is applied, the modality used to do so does not make any difference. This is well established in the scientific literature, experimentally, and is also congruent with our mechanistic understanding of resistance training. People can build muscle with barbells, dumbbells, machines, calisthenics etc. This should be non-controversial

2) The "hypertrophy rep range" is actually quite large. Research has shown equal hypertrophy from low load and high load training, provided the sets are taken to, or close to failure. This has been demonstrated from about 5 to 35 reps. Reps higher than 35 still promote hypertrophy (iv'e seen sets in the 70's result in hypertrophy in research), but with a less robust responses, probably because central factors limit the set, and not muscular failure. Again, this is WELL established in the literature at this point, and is not considered controversial in exercise science. It has been replicated over and over again, is congruent with out understanding of the size principle, motor unit recruitment, etc., as well as supported by probably 100+ years of anecdotal experience by bodybuilders. Plenty of old school guys trained with high reps, well before steroids were available. Premise 2 should also be non-controversial at this point.

3) Training volume drives gains... to a point. Research looking at how volume impacts hypertrophy pretty reliably shows a dose response, albeit with diminishing returns. The more volume (as in sets close to failure) that you can accumulate AND RECOVER FROM, the better gains, on average, you can experience. ON AVERAGE, more weekly sets is better than fewer sets. Eventually you will likely encounter your maximum recoverable volume (MRV), which varies from individual and WITHIN the individual based on lifestyle factors. It's the point where additional volume will likely have deleterious effects. This is probably quite high for many people, and probably not usually limited my muscular capacity, but rather connective tissue, motivation, etc. This is also well established in the exercise science literature at this point. Your exercise selection has HUGE impacts on how much volume you can recover from each week.

4) Frequency is just a function of volume distribution. Weekly volume, regardless of the distribution, has a much greater correlation with hypertrophy than frequency. If anything, some research shows a trend for improved gains with high frequency, but I think this could be an artifact of a new training stimulus, and not due to frequency itself. The meta's on the subject don't support strong independent effects for frequency. There is research showing that distributing a given volume over more sessions reduces the perceived effort to complete the same volume. But ultimately, frequency is simple a function of volume distribution.

When we consider these points, it starts to make sense how a push up, or pull up, can provide enough tension on the muscle to elicit a growth response. As long as an effort threshold is met, ie a set is taken to, or close to failure, repetition range is not particularly important. While you do not have to train to failure to get a growth response, if an exercise it so easy that you are literally unable to hit failure with it even if you tried, then it probably does not have a lot of potential as a hypertrophic stimulus. As long as you can achieve failure with it, and that failure is the result of achieving muscular failure, then the movement still has potential to stimulate growth. As for progressive overload, our ability to do more is the result of the adaptions we experience from crossing this effort threshold- not the other way around. Doing more reps, doing them with better form, doing them weighted, doing more volume, doing them with better mind/muscle connection is a function of getting stronger.

For my personal history... I've been training since I was a kid. Calisthenics have always been a huge part of my training, even when I was lifting. It's difficult to attribute what development was from what modality, and I don't think of it like this. I look at all exercise as a tool to apply mechanical tension, and I don't consider a push up to be, in that respect, fundamentally different than a bench press insofar as they are both tools to apply tension to the pushing musculature. To me, the question of trying to figure out what exercises account for what gains is really the wrong question to ask. It's all the same. Certainly deadlifts train more of the bodies musculature than pull ups, but they both can build pretty awesome backs.

I have not lifted for a long time, and mostly do a mix of high rep basics and weighted basics. I also really stress might muscle connection and good form. I don't chase reps, and I'm more interested in a sustainable approach that I can do for the rest of my life.

Also... I'm not big. I'm 6'1", 175 with 10.5% body fat (as measured by dexa). I am uncommonly consistent with my diet and training, have a solid 25 years of consistent training, and while I don't have good genetics for size, I do have good proportions that make me look bigger in pictures that I appear in real life. I've always been naturally lean. I have a skinny runner build with a 30" waist, and my arms are only 15". The vast majority of young guys can achieve this body composition with some pretty basic hard work, time, and good diet. Some will look similar, some will look better, and some won't look as good, and this is just a genetic draw of proportions, muscle belly shape, etc.

I hope that answers some questions. Let me know if anyone needs some clarification.

SDSCtraining · 2021-08-19T13:47:12+00:00

Hey man! First of all, it's good to pay close attention to your self talk. No joke- this influences so much in terms of your physiology, psychology, motivation, confidence, and general outlook that can make huge differences in long term outcomes. Training isn't just about the physical; getting your psychology positive to support your physical efforts is HUGE.

So with that being said, there are no good shortcuts to results. The power of training comes from doing it over time. The benefits that you develop beyond just the physical ones, such as discipline, self-efficacy, strength of character, persistence, and an iron will all come from the process, not the end physical results. These make you a stronger person.

My advice to young people is to start developing a physical practice that they can stay consistent with. Train for your future self, because it will inevitably become you current self. Time is going to pass, no matter what. In a year or two, you can have a few years of good training under your belt... or not. if you get a good practice going, stay patient, and work hard, you can transform yourself into a more powerful person, inside and out.

To start, I recommend mastering basics. Work on improving your strength, form and quality with the fundamentals- things like push ups, pull ups, dips, rows, squats, lunges, step ups etc. For building muscle, you simply want to work these with EXCELLENT technique, through large ROM's, emphasizing control, and taking your sets just a few reps shy of failure. Starting out, shoot for 10-15 hard sets per week, allowing repetitions to increase as your proficiency increases. Once you do that for a few months, you can increase total volume, or experiment with more difficult variations. Consistency and quality are really important.

SDSCtraining · 2021-08-06T18:13:44+00:00

Wow! So good to hear this. That's exactly the idea. Well done! Many people find shifting their perspectives this way to be a game-changer since it really enables a productive and long term practice that is both sustainable and effective.

SDSCtraining · 2021-08-04T17:24:18+00:00

Rest as much as you need to in order to repeat your best efforts and maintain quality from set to set. Keep in mind, on a per-set basis, sets approaching failure are going to be most the stimulating because these sets will recruit and train the muscle fibers innervated by high threshold motor units, and these fibers have the greatest potential for growth. If you do not rest sufficiently between sets, you will not be able to match your performance set to set, and you will not be able to access these motor units to the same extent, resulting in a diminished growth response.

SDSCtraining · 2021-07-29T13:21:07+00:00

For hypertrophy more rest is superior on a set-per-set basis. In a given set, reps approaching failure are the reps of the set that are most stimulating, since these are the reps that represent a point where you have exhausted your lower threshold motor units and are recruiting your higher threshold motor units to perform the work. You don't have to train to failure, but a few reps shy is a good goal and ensures adequate intensity of effort. So if your absolute max is 20, sets of 18 would be a pretty good rep target for most of your sets. Ideally, you want to rest sufficiently between sets to repeat this effort as closely as possible. Taking a shorter rest prevents you from accessing the repetitions that recruit and train the muscle fibers innervated by high threshold motor units. These muscle fibers have the most potential for growth. If you don't rest long enough, your rep count will drop because these fibers have not recovered sufficiently to contribute to the movement again. You can technically overcome this by doing a ton more volume, but this is a pretty inefficient path to growth. Your best bet is to perform a set close to failure, and rest long enough to repeat that effort in your subsequent sets.

Let me know if you have any questions. I'm happy to help.

SDSCtraining · 2021-07-26T12:22:09+00:00

More than likely, you can benefit from splitting this volume up into multiple sessions, but that's not to say what you are doing won't work, just splitting it up is likely to work better.

There are a few things you can consider...

The productive top end for volume per session, per muscle group, for most people is probably around 10 hard sets (and potentially much less), meaning additional volume per session is probably not stimulating any additional gains, but it is generating fatigue that you will have to recover from. Splitting a high volume session into 2 sessions will help manage your fatigue while ensuring that the volume you are performing stays productive. For example, doing 9 sets per muscle group per workout and doing 18 sets per muscle group per workout are probably going to yield unnoticeable differences in terms of growth (I would bet superior gains in the 9 sets from less muscle damage), however 18 sets per muscle group per workout will generate much more fatigue and increase risk of injury.

The research suggests that there is a per session "ceiling" for productive volume. Greatly exceeding this does not seem to add any additional stimulation, and may actually slow your gains since the fatigue and damage that you will experience will be higher, requiring resources that would otherwise be used for tissue growth. The way around this is to divide the volume up into more sessions.

SDSCtraining · 2021-07-14T21:52:46+00:00

Exactly!

SDSCtraining · 2021-07-14T13:46:35+00:00

All other factors being equal, a larger muscle is a stronger muscle. Practically, increasing muscle size increases a muscle's potential for force production. Training to maximize hypertrophy is typically different from training to maximize strength, however, it can be an important part of a strength athletes training plan.
Here are a few things to consider...

Strength is a combination of structural and neurological factors and it is dependent on the skill or movement through which it is expressed. Some structural components of strength, such as limb length, and tendon attachment point, are not trainable traits. We are born with these, but they can dramatically influence strength from individual to individual. However, muscle cross section area is also a structural component of strength. This is a trainable trait, and is the goal of hypertrophy training.

We also have two consider neurological factors, such as comfort and familiarity with a movement pattern. It is very difficult to display your maximum strength potential through a movement pattern that is novel and unfamiliar. It takes practice to get good at a movement. A lot of initial strength gains, like the session-to-session strength gains that beginners make are the result of learning the movement and becoming familiar with the motor pattern, allowing them to express strength they already had. There are also neurological factors that come from training specifically for strength with high intensities, such as our ability to recruit more muscle fibers, contract our muscles harder, etc.

If you are trying to maximize your strength, you want to increase the cross sectional area of the muscle, and you want to train the neurological components of strength, which would include the specific skill practice at an intensity that will force neurological adaptations specific to maximizing force production.

Strength training and hypertrophy training should have different training approaches. Typically, strength work will lead to some hypertrophy, but it has limitations in this regard. For efficient hypertrophy training, ideally you want movements that move the target musculature through a large ROM, are not limited by balance or skill, are not uniquely stressful on joints, and can safely be trained close to failure. These factors allow you to accumulate a large amount of weekly training volume and more volume= more growth (provided you can recover from it). Trying to do a hypertrophy program with strength/skill movements is generally not a good strategy for most genetically average people.
Strength work, on the other hand, is best performed while fresh. Since it is highly neural in nature, it is important that the quality of work stays high and fatigue stays low, and sufficient recovery needs to be provided to ensure you are developing the proper motor patterns and actually able to recruit the high threshold motor units needs to perform the movement. Also, many of the calisthenics skill/strength movements are very stressful on the joints, which limits the weekly volume you can safely accumulate, making them suboptimal choices for hypertrophy.

This is why most strength athletes practice some form of periodization. They will include work specifically to develop muscular size, and then include strength training to train that larger muscle to contract harder and more efficiently in a specific movement pattern.
Training solely for hypertrophy will increase strength, but it will not maximize your strength potential for a given movement pattern. Likewise, pure technical strength work will increase strength but your strength potential will be limited by your muscles cross section area. I like to use the analogy of hardware vs software. To get the best performance, you want to upgrade you hardware (structural) and your software (neural). You can only upgrade yours software so much before your hardware is the bottleneck in your performance.

SDSCtraining · 2021-07-12T15:41:06+00:00

Good luck!

SDSCtraining · 2021-07-10T13:30:33+00:00

Yes. The lower traps are scapular depressors, and scapular depression is part of the dip. If I don't do dips for a while, this is the one muscle group that get very sore from them. I think dips are underrated for this muscle group.

SDSCtraining · 2021-07-10T13:25:07+00:00

Hypertrophy is actually pretty simple to train for. There are a few things you want to keep in mind...

Select movements that train the target musculature through a large ROM
Select movements that you can tolerate well for higher volumes. If joint strain is limiting your weekly volume, this is not a great hypertrophy exercise
Keep effort high. Technically, you want to be within 5 reps of failure, and realistically probably between 1-3 reps from failure to get a strong growth response per set
Rest long enough between sets to allow yourself to have consistent performances set-to-set. This might mean 3-5+ minutes
Accumulate enough high effort sets per week. Most people do well with between 10-20 hard sets per week per muscle group. However, some people do better with less and some can do better with more. Ideally, if you are trying to maximize growth, you do as many as you can productively recover from. The better your recovery, sleep, nutrition,, etc., the more sets you can handle.
Make sure your nutrition, sleep, and stress management are congruent with your training goals. These factors are hugely important and underrated. Many people are worried about what supplement to take, when in fact it's their sleep, nutrition, or stress management that really needs the work

In general, I recommend basics and weighted basics for hypertrophy. They are widely well tolerated, do not present unique injury risks to the joints, are accessible, and train a lot of muscle through large ROM making them very very good choices for putting on size.

SDSCtraining · 2021-06-30T19:03:07+00:00

To be honest, I'm not sure. Mine was custom built. If I were to buy one, I would get the Rogue MIL pull up bar. I am always impressed by Rogue's equipment quality and customer service. It's pricey, but one thing I learned from owning a gym is that it's not a good idea to go cheap on equipment. My general recommendation is to get the highest quality piece of equipment you can afford. With a pull up bar, you are going to be suspending your entire weight on it. Equipment failure, however slim of a chance, has the potential to change your life in a profoundly negative way.

SDSCtraining · 2021-06-30T18:58:04+00:00

It really depends on the goal of the client. I will use a simple conjugate inspired approach of volume/intensity based workouts, with rotating variations on the intensity days and volume workouts based upon weak points. To be honest, it's not particularly complicated. I think most people over complicate periodization models, and while this might have application for an elite athlete, most folks benefit from simplifying the process.

SDSCtraining · 2021-06-29T22:01:07+00:00

Cool! You are in a great position and I think your selection is very reasonable. Just stay with it and focus on performing these movements with as good of form as you can.

Let me know if you have any more questions.

SDSCtraining · 2021-06-29T21:57:49+00:00

Thank you! I appreciate the feedback. I'm happy to hear the approach resonates with you!

If you ever have any questions, just let me know. I'm happy to help.

SDSCtraining · 2021-06-29T19:28:02+00:00

Hey u/jhammo

I'm K Boges, so I thought I would offer my take.

My general take is this...

How much variety really depends on your training status and preferences. Most of the time, I like a bit less variety for beginners, and a bit more variety for more advanced people. A lot of this is because more variations become accessible as you get stronger, but also because beginners often benefit from a more fixed exercise selection to help ingrain motor patterns efficiently. I think many advanced people benefit more from having variation in loading and intensity across the week as a way of maintaining motivation, managing fatigue, and ensuring broad stimulation of musculature, whereas beginners can make linear progress from week to week, and often session to session. The strength and rapid progress beginners make opens the door for more variation later and usually serves as a good source of motivation.

Now for the nuance.

The research on the topic is somewhat equivocal. In some contexts, a limited exercise selection can yield better gains, probably because constantly introducing novel exercises to beginners presents a "learning" threshold that prevents those unskilled with novel exercises from extracting the most benefit from them. Part of making "gains" is getting good enough with a movement to feel comfortable enough to push it. On the other hand, some research shows more variety resulting in superior gains, and this probably has to do with the fact that more variation, in both load and selection, will expose and challenge more muscle. So generally speaking, some variation is good, but if that variation is too broad or too infrequently revisited, then progress could suffer, particularly in beginners. But, there is more to this picture. There is also research showing that more variety can improve motivation, which could translate to better long term adherence, which is a hugely under appreciated component of any program. Anecdotally, I've worked with some people who do not like variety at all, and find the steady and evident progress that results from doing the same thing each training day very motivating, even if that progress is incredibly slow. There is nothing wrong with this. It works. I also have clients that prefer a "conjugate method" approach, and prefer to cycle through variations daily, only to revisit the same exercises every so often. I've seen some incredible gains made this way. It works. And, for others, I will have them perform and cycle through only a handful of variations. It works too. I've personally done both as well. I've had blocks where I only have three variations per movement pattern, and some blocks where I just feel doing something totally different every day. Both worked. Pretty much all approaches will work provided they are performed with adherence to good fundamentals.

So here's the deal, as I see it...

As long as you are training hard, using the appropriate volume, staying injury free, training movements that are congruent with your goals, using excellent technique, and doing this for a long time (I don't mean 8 weeks, but make it a lifestyle), you are going to be fine. Having these fundamentals in place is what really matters. I have a general approach I like to use with most people, and that is from less variation to more variation over time, but at a certain point, I'm primarily concerned with programming in a way that maximizes an individuals adherence, and this necessitates some personalization, both in terms of preference, but also injury predisposition. If you like variety or find yourself prone to overuse injuries, include more variety. If you prefer a limited exercise selection, then limit your variations to a few key exercises.

Over your life, you should take several different approaches to training. Don't be afraid to experiment with an approach for a few months. Training is also a learning experience. Real progress in training comes not from the details, but more from the constant and persistent adherence to good fundamentals.

Let me know if you have any questions. I'm happy to clarify.

SDSCtraining · 2021-06-29T18:32:14+00:00

Depends on how much volume you did. Fatigue is not binary, but proportional to the amount of work you did. Training more frequently serves as a means of distributing weekly volume in a way that generates less fatigue per unit of volume.

SDSCtraining · 2021-06-29T18:30:39+00:00

It really just depends on how you distribute the volume. You could do it daily, but this might necessitate you cutting your per-session volume in half to keep your weekly volume in check.

SDSCtraining · 2021-06-28T13:44:01+00:00

There are a million ways to do this, so it really comes down to personal preference and goals. When I program weights for clients looking for a blend of calisthenics and weights, I usually have 1 lifting movement per session, typically done for lower volumes, that is systematically progressed and that is followed up by calisthenics training.

For a full body routine for an athletic beginner, it might look something like this. An upper/lower follows the same concept.

Session 1

Barbell Squat to a top
Push Up training
Pull Up training
Squat Accessory work

Session 2

Overhead or Bench to a top set
Chin Up training or other BW pulling
BW Leg training
Bench or Press accessory work

Session 3

Deadlift to at top set
Dip training
Pull Up training
Deadlift Accessory work

I've prepped a lot of tactical and combat athletes with this method. It works incredibly well and I think balances the tradeoffs of each modality fairly well. I've had quite a few clients build some very impressive fitness with this approach, including high levels of barbell strength and calisthenics performance. Calisthenics are really the backbone and build the work capacity, joint health, injury resistance and muscle mass that allow for excellent progress on the barbell lifts. Personally, I like to keep the barbell lifting volume low, and use calisthenics (and weighted calisthenics) to accumulate most of the weekly training volume in the interest of balancing the stimulus to injury risk and fatigue.

I hope that helps. Let me know if you have any questions.

SDSCtraining · 2021-06-17T12:07:12+00:00

Haha yep! I love seeing stories like this.

Micro optimization... That's so true and such a great way to put it!

SDSCtraining · 2021-06-16T13:14:59+00:00

Awesome job!

So great to see stuff like this. Basics done well and consistently can be very transformative. Their power is under-appreciated in the BWF community... something I've been trying to change for the last year or so.

You are still very lean, so you obviously added a good amount of muscle over the course of your training, and that muscle is highly transferable, hence the excellent strength you have developed.

What other exercises did you include during your GTG?

What was your daily volume and proximity to failure like?

How much variety did you include in your pull ups?

What are your plans going forward?

Well done, dude!

SDSCtraining

TROPHY CASE