What is the Point of Starting Strength by Rippetoe?

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
49,992
6,301
136
I picked up the 2nd edition and have been reading through it. I have a question:

What is the point of Starting Strength?

This may sound obvious, but...physical strength? What does that mean - you can lift heavy stuff up? What is the goal or point of the program? From what I've read so far, it's not a bulk-gaining program and isn't really designed to give you big muscles persay, rather to make you "stronger". I'm not clear on what the ultimate goal is...to be able to lift heavy stuff up? :confused: I read a bit about it in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strength_training#Benefits

It seems like there are programs to help you lose weight, gain muscle look ripped, become strong, etc. etc. etc. What are the outcomes of Starting Strength? Why bother doing it?
 

GenHoth

Platinum Member
Jul 5, 2007
2,106
0
0
The main point of starting strength is to introduce you to strength training. Simple I know. When people first start weight lifting their body has an adjustment period. They won't take advantage of many of the more advanced routines until they have adapted their bodies. Starting strength covers this initial period where you don't have to add a bunch of mass to gain lots of strength.
 

scootermaster

Platinum Member
Nov 29, 2005
2,411
0
0
Originally posted by: crt1530
/facepalm

Not so fast.

He does make a good point, sorta. What's the point of doing squats [for the average person] if all you're going to do is, you know, squat?

The average out-of-shape person doesn't want to set PRs in squats. They want to look better. They want do be able to do something (be it look good naked, run a half marathon, play a sport like they did when they were younger, etc etc). But if all you can do is, you know, squat a ton, what's the freakin' point?

Of course there are answers to that question, but the question itself is by no means stupid. Maybe you're in this minority here (seeing as you seem to be a strength trainer, obviously you are), but 99 out of 100 people would rather just "look good" and/or be able to have so sort of functional accomplishment (dunk a basketball, run farther/faster, etc) than just be overall "stronger".

So there's no reason not to explain why being stronger is a benefit.


 

paulxcook

Diamond Member
May 1, 2005
4,277
1
0
I would think being stronger (and by extension bigger) would in and of itself be the benefit. The "point". It's probably not for people who want to "get toned" or just focus on chest and arms.
 

presidentender

Golden Member
Jan 23, 2008
1,166
0
76
Originally posted by: scootermaster

So there's no reason not to explain why being stronger is a benefit.

I'm an IT guy and web programmer for my university's student affairs department while I go to school. Doesn't require strength, right? Until it's convenient to carry a stack of 3 CRT monitors (which was dumb). Or a server. Or move a UPS by hand. Or pick up a computer from across campus that your coworkers left because it was, quote, "too heavy." I can also take fewer trips carrying groceries, move (as in furniture from one place to another) more comfortably, and do odd jobs requiring physical strength.

Furthermore, there are secondary benefits to being strong: I look good, I feel good, and most importantly, I get smarter when I work out.

That's why.

Edit: This isn't to praise Starting Strength; it's an explanation of why lifting just to be stronger makes sense.
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
49,992
6,301
136
Originally posted by: scootermaster
Originally posted by: crt1530
/facepalm

Not so fast.

He does make a good point, sorta. What's the point of doing squats [for the average person] if all you're going to do is, you know, squat?

The average out-of-shape person doesn't want to set PRs in squats. They want to look better. They want do be able to do something (be it look good naked, run a half marathon, play a sport like they did when they were younger, etc etc). But if all you can do is, you know, squat a ton, what's the freakin' point?

Of course there are answers to that question, but the question itself is by no means stupid. Maybe you're in this minority here (seeing as you seem to be a strength trainer, obviously you are), but 99 out of 100 people would rather just "look good" and/or be able to have so sort of functional accomplishment (dunk a basketball, run farther/faster, etc) than just be overall "stronger".

So there's no reason not to explain why being stronger is a benefit.

Yeah that's pretty much my point and the question I'm asking. I mean, I work on computers daily, but I have enough strength to lift them up and move them around as I am now, and I foresee myself working on computers indefinitely, so what's the point? Is Rippetoe's program just to get physically stronger...?

I'm not knocking getting stronger, but I am questioning the validity of it versus other systems of physical fitness. I see a lot of different programs designed for losing weight, bulking up, cutting down, getting strong, and so on, I'm just trying to understand what the point of Rippetoe's system is (and getting stronger is, I guess) versus going on a program specifically designed to improve your physique rather than your physical strength. Is the end result so you can sit in your office and say to your fellow cubicle dweller, "hey man, I can squat 500 pounds" ? That's what I'm trying to get at.

I guess I can see it if you're into strength training as a hobby and enjoy dead lifting and squats and whatnot, or have a job or hobby that requires high strength like being a construction working or playing football, but I don't really see where it fits in besides that. I see Starting Strength touted around here like nobody's business, but it doesn't seem to be oriented towards actually gaining bulk and getting defined abs and muscles, which is what a lot of people seem to be after.
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
49,992
6,301
136
Originally posted by: presidentender
Originally posted by: scootermaster

So there's no reason not to explain why being stronger is a benefit.

I'm an IT guy and web programmer for my university's student affairs department while I go to school. Doesn't require strength, right? Until it's convenient to carry a stack of 3 CRT monitors (which was dumb). Or a server. Or move a UPS by hand. Or pick up a computer from across campus that your coworkers left because it was, quote, "too heavy." I can also take fewer trips carrying groceries, move (as in furniture from one place to another) more comfortably, and do odd jobs requiring physical strength.

Furthermore, there are secondary benefits to being strong: I look good, I feel good, and most importantly, I get smarter when I work out.

That's why.

Ah, see, that's the kind of answer I'm looking for! I mean, it's not like we're cavemen chasing food all day or working in the fields of a farm all day long. I'm trying to see why I should start using Rippetoe's program if my goal is to get in better shape.

For example, I am a skinny guy with a pudgy mid-section. I am on a weight-loss program this summer (which is working extremely well), and I'm trying to figure out where to go after that. Ideally I'd like to have a good physique - 6-pack abs, well-defined arms, the whole nine. I have no arm definition to speak of and a keg in place of a 6-pack. Rippetoe's program is constantly pushed on this forum and I'm wondering if it's the right way to go for bulking up and getting some muscles. If the whole point of Rippetoe's program is to gain strength, and oh yeah by the way you get improve muscle definition, then maybe it's not the right program for me since I'm not very concerned with physical strength, so much as not looking physically like a slob. That's more along the lines of what I'm getting at :)
 

scootermaster

Platinum Member
Nov 29, 2005
2,411
0
0
Originally posted by: paulxcook
I would think being stronger (and by extension bigger) would in and of itself be the benefit. The "point". It's probably not for people who want to "get toned" or just focus on chest and arms.

That's the cheap answer.

Yes, you can slam curl jockeys or whatever, but why is wanting to be super toned and lean and worse a goal than having a high squat total?

Or, for that matter, why is wanting to be able to curl or bench a ton any worse a goal than wanting to be able to squat a ton?

Listen, I'm doing SS. You all know that. So I'm obviously not slamming it. But there's no reason not to need/want a better explanation than "squats RULE" and "curls are fer gays!"


Fair enough?
 

presidentender

Golden Member
Jan 23, 2008
1,166
0
76
Originally posted by: Kaido
Ah, see, that's the kind of answer I'm looking for! I mean, it's not like we're cavemen chasing food all day or working in the fields of a farm all day long. I'm trying to see why I should start using Rippetoe's program if my goal is to get in better shape.

For example, I am a skinny guy with a pudgy mid-section. I am on a weight-loss program this summer (which is working extremely well), and I'm trying to figure out where to go after that. Ideally I'd like to have a good physique - 6-pack abs, well-defined arms, the whole nine. I have no arm definition to speak of and a keg in place of a 6-pack. Rippetoe's program is constantly pushed on this forum and I'm wondering if it's the right way to go for bulking up and getting some muscles. If the whole point of Rippetoe's program is to gain strength, and oh yeah by the way you get improve muscle definition, then maybe it's not the right program for me since I'm not very concerned with physical strength, so much as not looking physically like a slob. That's more along the lines of what I'm getting at :)

"Getting toned" is about diet first and exercise second. My advice is to figure out how many calories you use per day, then how many you take in (google a bit; there are web sites which can track these things to ridiculous precision), and make sure that you're running a deficit and still getting enough nutrients.

You should absolutely lift weights as well, and your routine should be based around squats, deadlift, and bench (or overhead) press to start with. With all due respect, you're unlikely to invent a routine on your own that's better (even for your goals) for what you want than Starting Strength.

For god's sake, don't be one of those guys who does bench, curls, and sit-ups to the neglect of the rest of your body! Your back and your legs are actually more important for creating an overall impression than your pecs, and unless you're very dedicated, your biceps are essentially meaningless.
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
49,992
6,301
136
Originally posted by: presidentender
Originally posted by: Kaido
Ah, see, that's the kind of answer I'm looking for! I mean, it's not like we're cavemen chasing food all day or working in the fields of a farm all day long. I'm trying to see why I should start using Rippetoe's program if my goal is to get in better shape.

For example, I am a skinny guy with a pudgy mid-section. I am on a weight-loss program this summer (which is working extremely well), and I'm trying to figure out where to go after that. Ideally I'd like to have a good physique - 6-pack abs, well-defined arms, the whole nine. I have no arm definition to speak of and a keg in place of a 6-pack. Rippetoe's program is constantly pushed on this forum and I'm wondering if it's the right way to go for bulking up and getting some muscles. If the whole point of Rippetoe's program is to gain strength, and oh yeah by the way you get improve muscle definition, then maybe it's not the right program for me since I'm not very concerned with physical strength, so much as not looking physically like a slob. That's more along the lines of what I'm getting at :)

"Getting toned" is about diet first and exercise second. My advice is to figure out how many calories you use per day, then how many you take in (google a bit; there are web sites which can track these things to ridiculous precision), and make sure that you're running a deficit and still getting enough nutrients.

You should absolutely lift weights as well, and your routine should be based around squats, deadlift, and bench (or overhead) press to start with. With all due respect, you're unlikely to invent a routine on your own that's better (even for your goals) for what you want than Starting Strength.

For god's sake, don't be one of those guys who does bench, curls, and sit-ups to the neglect of the rest of your body! Your back and your legs are actually more important for creating an overall impression than your pecs, and unless you're very dedicated, your biceps are essentially meaningless.

Oh, I'm on top of dieting like nobody's business ;) I totally believe that it's 80% diet, 20% workout.

So...to bulk up and improve my physique, just go ahead and follow Starting Strength?
 

scootermaster

Platinum Member
Nov 29, 2005
2,411
0
0
Originally posted by: Kaido
Originally posted by: presidentender
Originally posted by: Kaido
Ah, see, that's the kind of answer I'm looking for! I mean, it's not like we're cavemen chasing food all day or working in the fields of a farm all day long. I'm trying to see why I should start using Rippetoe's program if my goal is to get in better shape.

For example, I am a skinny guy with a pudgy mid-section. I am on a weight-loss program this summer (which is working extremely well), and I'm trying to figure out where to go after that. Ideally I'd like to have a good physique - 6-pack abs, well-defined arms, the whole nine. I have no arm definition to speak of and a keg in place of a 6-pack. Rippetoe's program is constantly pushed on this forum and I'm wondering if it's the right way to go for bulking up and getting some muscles. If the whole point of Rippetoe's program is to gain strength, and oh yeah by the way you get improve muscle definition, then maybe it's not the right program for me since I'm not very concerned with physical strength, so much as not looking physically like a slob. That's more along the lines of what I'm getting at :)

"Getting toned" is about diet first and exercise second. My advice is to figure out how many calories you use per day, then how many you take in (google a bit; there are web sites which can track these things to ridiculous precision), and make sure that you're running a deficit and still getting enough nutrients.

You should absolutely lift weights as well, and your routine should be based around squats, deadlift, and bench (or overhead) press to start with. With all due respect, you're unlikely to invent a routine on your own that's better (even for your goals) for what you want than Starting Strength.

For god's sake, don't be one of those guys who does bench, curls, and sit-ups to the neglect of the rest of your body! Your back and your legs are actually more important for creating an overall impression than your pecs, and unless you're very dedicated, your biceps are essentially meaningless.

Oh, I'm on top of dieting like nobody's business ;) I totally believe that it's 80% diet, 20% workout.

So...to bulk up and improve my physique, just go ahead and follow Starting Strength?


That's actually not quite right.

What you end up looking like is more like 60% genetics, 25% diet and 15% workouts. It IS possible to "out-gym" your genetics, but that's only if you're a movie star and have nothing to do all day but work out, and eat meals cooked by your personal chef. For the rest of us, who have 1-2 hours to dedicate to the gym, and have to eat store-bought food, and prepare it ourselves, it's almost impossible to out work your genetics. You're going to look like what you're going to look like, and you can make minor impacts on that, but your genetics will "fail" you long before your workouts of your diet do (assuming you have the willpower to keep up both of the later).

Now, that's in the abstract (as in, "will I get big arms/a sixpack"). But holding that constant, i.e. dealing just with "you", then you're right, it's 80/20 diet/workout in terms of what will change your body.
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
49,992
6,301
136
Originally posted by: scootermaster
Originally posted by: Kaido
Originally posted by: presidentender
Originally posted by: Kaido
Ah, see, that's the kind of answer I'm looking for! I mean, it's not like we're cavemen chasing food all day or working in the fields of a farm all day long. I'm trying to see why I should start using Rippetoe's program if my goal is to get in better shape.

For example, I am a skinny guy with a pudgy mid-section. I am on a weight-loss program this summer (which is working extremely well), and I'm trying to figure out where to go after that. Ideally I'd like to have a good physique - 6-pack abs, well-defined arms, the whole nine. I have no arm definition to speak of and a keg in place of a 6-pack. Rippetoe's program is constantly pushed on this forum and I'm wondering if it's the right way to go for bulking up and getting some muscles. If the whole point of Rippetoe's program is to gain strength, and oh yeah by the way you get improve muscle definition, then maybe it's not the right program for me since I'm not very concerned with physical strength, so much as not looking physically like a slob. That's more along the lines of what I'm getting at :)

"Getting toned" is about diet first and exercise second. My advice is to figure out how many calories you use per day, then how many you take in (google a bit; there are web sites which can track these things to ridiculous precision), and make sure that you're running a deficit and still getting enough nutrients.

You should absolutely lift weights as well, and your routine should be based around squats, deadlift, and bench (or overhead) press to start with. With all due respect, you're unlikely to invent a routine on your own that's better (even for your goals) for what you want than Starting Strength.

For god's sake, don't be one of those guys who does bench, curls, and sit-ups to the neglect of the rest of your body! Your back and your legs are actually more important for creating an overall impression than your pecs, and unless you're very dedicated, your biceps are essentially meaningless.

Oh, I'm on top of dieting like nobody's business ;) I totally believe that it's 80% diet, 20% workout.

So...to bulk up and improve my physique, just go ahead and follow Starting Strength?


That's actually not quite right.

What you end up looking like is more like 60% genetics, 25% diet and 15% workouts. It IS possible to "out-gym" your genetics, but that's only if you're a movie star and have nothing to do all day but work out, and eat meals cooked by your personal chef. For the rest of us, who have 1-2 hours to dedicate to the gym, and have to eat store-bought food, and prepare it ourselves, it's almost impossible to out work your genetics. You're going to look like what you're going to look like, and you can make minor impacts on that, but your genetics will "fail" you long before your workouts of your diet do (assuming you have the willpower to keep up both of the later).

Now, that's in the abstract (as in, "will I get big arms/a sixpack"). But holding that constant, i.e. dealing just with "you", then you're right, it's 80/20 diet/workout in terms of what will change your body.

Yeah, genetics are a big part of it. So...do you suggest Starting Strength then? :)
 

brikis98

Diamond Member
Jul 5, 2005
7,253
8
0
Let me give this one a shot, as I do think it's a fair question.

This is a bit obvious, but the "point" of Starting Strength is to teach you the most effective way to do strength training. Wikipedia defines strength training as "the use of resistance to muscular contraction to build the strength, anaerobic endurance and size of skeletal muscles". The SS book brings up the most important lifts to do (esp. for beginners), shows you how to do the lifts properly, and lays out a strength training program that will work wonders for novices. Originally, it was built as an instruction manual for coaches, but the 2nd edition has changed the focus to actual weight lifters themselves. It is simply a guide to one of the best known systems for building strength.

Now, that takes care of the book. The next question you'll ask then is "why do strength training" or perhaps more importantly, "what are the benefits of increasing strength"? This is a slightly different question with many, many answers. The same Wikipedia article has a benefits of strength training section which has a decent list:

The benefits of weight training include greater muscular strength, improved muscle tone and appearance, increased endurance, enhanced bone density, and improved cardiovascular fitness.

Many people take up weight training to improve their physical attractiveness. Most men can develop substantial muscles; most women lack the testosterone to do this, but they can develop a firm, "toned" (see below) physique, and they can increase their strength by the same proportion as that achieved by men (but usually from a significantly lower starting point). Ultimately an individual's genetics dictate the response to weight training stimuli to some extent.

The body's basal metabolic rate increases with increases in muscle mass, which promotes long-term fat loss and helps dieters avoid yo-yo dieting. Moreover, intense workouts elevate the metabolism for several hours following the workout, which also promotes fat loss.

Weight training also provides functional benefits. Stronger muscles improve posture, provide better support for joints, and reduce the risk of injury from everyday activities. Older people who take up weight training can prevent some of the loss of muscle tissue that normally accompanies aging?and even regain some functional strength?and by doing so become less frail. They may be able to avoid some types of physical disability. Weight-bearing exercise also helps to prevent osteoporosis. The benefits of weight training for older people have been confirmed by studies of people who began engaging in it even in their 80s and 90s.

Stronger muscles improve performance in a variety of sports. Sport-specific training routines are used by many competitors. These often specify that the speed of muscle contraction during weight training should be the same as that of the particular sport.

Though weight training can stimulate the cardiovascular system, many exercise physiologists, based on their observation of maximal oxygen uptake, argue that aerobics training is a better cardiovascular stimulus. Central catheter monitoring during resistance training reveals increased cardiac output, suggesting that strength training shows potential for cardiovascular exercise. However, a 2007 meta-analysis found that, though aerobic training is an effective therapy for heart failure patients, combined aerobic and strength training is ineffective.

One side-effect of any intense exercise is increased levels of dopamine, serotonin and norepinephrine, which can help to improve mood and counter feelings of depression

If any of the above benefits interest you, the Starting Strength book is a great way for beginners to achieve them.

Now, the last important thing to discuss: how does the SS approach differ from other routines? Most routines that involve any kind of resistance training share many of the same principles and benefits of SS. The difference is that they may not focus on building sheer strength, but on something else. Moreover, most routines come with a recommended diet which will also greatly affect the results. SS with a massive calorie surplus (such as the recommended 1 gallon of milk a day) will produce HUGE gains in muscle mass and strength. SS with a calorie deficit (but sufficient protein intake) will allow a person to lose body fat and maintain muscle mass.

* For example, body building is concerned only with aesthetics - that is, the size, mass and definition of the muscles. The best exercises to accomplish this (especially for beginners) are still largely the same as described in SS, but the number of sets, reps, weight progression, and diet are geared towards muscle hypertrophy instead of strength gain. Of course, strength gain will still occur, but it is almost a side effect of body building. This is why Arnold (a body builder), despite the larger looking muscles, is nowhere near as strong as Andy Bolton, one of the worlds strongest powerlifters (deadlifting 1003lbs in the picture).

* Powerlifting, incidentally, is strength training through and through: the goal there is to gain as much strength as possible so as to lift the maximum amount of weight in certain lifts (deadlift, squat, bench).

* Olympic lifting is strength training focused around a different set of lifts: the clean & jerk and the snatch.

* Crossfit style routines are "by design, broad, general, and inclusive". CrossFit maintains that proficiency is required in each of 10 fitness domains: cardiovascular/respiratory endurance, stamina, strength, flexibility, power, speed, agility, balance, coordination, and accuracy. So, Crossfit routines include components to boost your strength, but as it's only one of the 10 domains, they also include components to work on the other 9.

* As alluded to earlier, routines built around losing fat usually use weight training not as a means to increase strength (which is quite difficult to do while cutting) but rather as a way to maintain muscle mass. In fact, many dieters use the SS routine not to become stronger, but actually to prevent themselves from getting weaker.

Anyways, there are countless routines out there and they each have different focuses and hence, different benefits. In general, you want to pick the one that most closely aligns with your desired goals, which you should have figured out beforehand in very concrete, measurable terms.

Now, to bring it back to the book. It is my personal opinion that SS is so highly recommended on this forum because it is probably THE most effective routine for beginners regardless of what goal they are seeking. If you have never done resistance training before, jumping into a body building or power lifting routine can be a bad idea. Many of those routines are built for lifters that already have a solid base of muscle, strength and other adaptations. And be careful, some routines out there (esp BB routines) that work for the "pros" are only effective when backed up with massive amounts of steroids & other performance enhancers. Anyways, SS is useful because it lays down a terrific strength training foundation that can prepare you for any of the outer routines. Most people stick with it only for a year or two before the linear progression becomes ineffective, at which point they are ready to move on to a more advanced program and one that is more specific to their goals.

 

paulxcook

Diamond Member
May 1, 2005
4,277
1
0
Originally posted by: scootermaster
Originally posted by: paulxcook
I would think being stronger (and by extension bigger) would in and of itself be the benefit. The "point". It's probably not for people who want to "get toned" or just focus on chest and arms.

That's the cheap answer.

Yes, you can slam curl jockeys or whatever, but why is wanting to be super toned and lean and worse a goal than having a high squat total?

Or, for that matter, why is wanting to be able to curl or bench a ton any worse a goal than wanting to be able to squat a ton?

Listen, I'm doing SS. You all know that. So I'm obviously not slamming it. But there's no reason not to need/want a better explanation than "squats RULE" and "curls are fer gays!"


Fair enough?

It's not a cheap answer. It's the truth. It's not for everyone, though it could be if people looked at things differently. I do personally look down on people who only train the fratboy muscles, but that has nothing to do with the fact that if you're not interested in getting stronger, SS probably isn't what you're looking for. Which is what I said.

On SS you can easily also get bigger and lose weight, because you're lifting heavy which burns calories and will require your muscles to get bigger to handle the weight. But the point of it isn't to work on your bicep peak, or really bring out the sweep of your quads, or get a ripped 6 pack. If those are your (that's a general "your", I know you're doing SS) goals, then SS might not be your best option.

Benefits of SS for the average person:

- easy to follow
- you only work out 3 days a week, and the workouts go quick because they're based on efficient compound movements
- you get stronger all over, gain muscle all over, and lose fat if your diet is in check
- you build a good base of strength that you can transfer over to whatever program you decide to move on to later.

 

gramboh

Platinum Member
May 3, 2003
2,207
0
0
Why SS for Newbs?

#1) You have no idea how to weight lift efficiently. The program teaches the essential compound lifts and helps you establish a base of strength to train further from. There is no point in doing an advanced body building routine with no base. SS is a straightforward relatively simple program.

#2) Balance, it works all the major muscle groups efficiently and effectively. Strength imbalance (e.g. only doing 'beach' muscles) is dangerous and can lead to injuries.

#3) Increase in strength = increase in performance. Doing a lot of heavy squats can help you increase vertical jump/power and run faster (stride frequency). There isn't a direct translation to each sport, but overall increase in strength has helped me in all recreational activities (including running)

#4) Aesthetic, of course everyone wants to look good. You will look good when your workout hits all major areas of the body in a balanced manner. Don't be worried you will look like a super heavyweight powerlifter, you won't unless that is what you are. Diet is of course key here.

#5) Progressive loading (adding 5lbs to each exercise per workout) makes program intrinsically motivating (e.g. excited to get a personal best next day in the gym)

#6) Proven results, program has worked awesome for many people, myself include, lots of testimonials to support it (from beginners) so why wouldn't you try the program?
 

presidentender

Golden Member
Jan 23, 2008
1,166
0
76
Originally posted by: gramboh

#2) Balance, it works all the major muscle groups efficiently and effectively. Strength imbalance (e.g. only doing 'beach' muscles) is dangerous and can lead to injuries.

And it looks retarded.
 

skace

Lifer
Jan 23, 2001
14,488
7
81
Originally posted by: crt1530
/facepalm

I've started writing about 6 different responses to the original post and some of the replies in this thread but after several paragraphs I start to realize that maybe crt's answer is the best.

So now, instead of educating, I'm just going to post all the phrases that annoy the piss out of me.

"physical strength? What does that mean - you can lift heavy stuff up? What is the goal or point of the program?"

"What's the point of doing squats [for the average person] if all you're going to do is, you know, squat? "

"It's probably not for people who want to "get toned""

"I'm not knocking getting stronger, but I am questioning the validity of it versus other systems of physical fitness."

"I see Starting Strength touted around here like nobody's business, but it doesn't seem to be oriented towards actually gaining bulk and getting defined abs and muscles, which is what a lot of people seem to be after."

"maybe it's not the right program for me since I'm not very concerned with physical strength, so much as not looking physically like a slob"

"but why is wanting to be super toned and lean and worse a goal than having a high squat total? "
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
49,992
6,301
136
Originally posted by: skace
Originally posted by: crt1530
/facepalm

I've started writing about 6 different responses to the original post and some of the replies in this thread but after several paragraphs I start to realize that maybe crt's answer is the best.

So now, instead of educating, I'm just going to post all the phrases that annoy the piss out of me.

"physical strength? What does that mean - you can lift heavy stuff up? What is the goal or point of the program?"

"What's the point of doing squats [for the average person] if all you're going to do is, you know, squat? "

"It's probably not for people who want to "get toned""

"I'm not knocking getting stronger, but I am questioning the validity of it versus other systems of physical fitness."

"I see Starting Strength touted around here like nobody's business, but it doesn't seem to be oriented towards actually gaining bulk and getting defined abs and muscles, which is what a lot of people seem to be after."

"maybe it's not the right program for me since I'm not very concerned with physical strength, so much as not looking physically like a slob"

"but why is wanting to be super toned and lean and worse a goal than having a high squat total? "

I'm glad to see you're so helpful towards noobs like me who have never stepped foot in a gym before - I really appreciate it! I wish I was like you and was simply born with a full knowledge of everything related to working out and physical fitness. Pardon me for not understanding what strength training means versus bodybuilding, high-intensity training, and other forms of physical training! It's extremely helpful that you've posted exactly the phrases that you've found annoying in my thread. I guess I should learn to keep my mouth shut in the future and not learn what the differences are just because I'm a bit confused and I'm seeking the correct information to help me decide on a personal fitness plan. I mean, really - why should we share information on a forum when there are knowledgable members like you who would rather just post quoted phrases that, quote, "annoy the piss out of me" ?

Honestly though, I appreciate the informative replies from users like Scootermaster and brikis98. I didn't even know there was a difference between "Strength Training" and "Bodybuilding". All I see are guys lifting weights. Pardon my newness to the hobby - I've never even owned so much as a barbell before and I'd rather not go around learning the wrong way. It may be so super-obvious to you what "Starting Strength" implies that you have to point out each of my newbie questions in a special post explaining why you realized that crt's answer is the best, but you know what - it's not obvious to me. I want to learn what the different disciplines are before choosing a course to go on. If you're going to play Tennis you shouldn't train for Football, and if I want to get in shape it'd be nice to know the differences between the different forms of weight training before committing myself to a new program.

Sheesh man...
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
49,992
6,301
136
Originally posted by: paulxcook
Originally posted by: scootermaster
Originally posted by: paulxcook
I would think being stronger (and by extension bigger) would in and of itself be the benefit. The "point". It's probably not for people who want to "get toned" or just focus on chest and arms.

That's the cheap answer.

Yes, you can slam curl jockeys or whatever, but why is wanting to be super toned and lean and worse a goal than having a high squat total?

Or, for that matter, why is wanting to be able to curl or bench a ton any worse a goal than wanting to be able to squat a ton?

Listen, I'm doing SS. You all know that. So I'm obviously not slamming it. But there's no reason not to need/want a better explanation than "squats RULE" and "curls are fer gays!"


Fair enough?

It's not a cheap answer. It's the truth. It's not for everyone, though it could be if people looked at things differently. I do personally look down on people who only train the fratboy muscles, but that has nothing to do with the fact that if you're not interested in getting stronger, SS probably isn't what you're looking for. Which is what I said.

On SS you can easily also get bigger and lose weight, because you're lifting heavy which burns calories and will require your muscles to get bigger to handle the weight. But the point of it isn't to work on your bicep peak, or really bring out the sweep of your quads, or get a ripped 6 pack. If those are your (that's a general "your", I know you're doing SS) goals, then SS might not be your best option.

Benefits of SS for the average person:

- easy to follow
- you only work out 3 days a week, and the workouts go quick because they're based on efficient compound movements
- you get stronger all over, gain muscle all over, and lose fat if your diet is in check
- you build a good base of strength that you can transfer over to whatever program you decide to move on to later.

So is it fair to say that Starting Strength is a good foundation for future muscle-building activities, whether you want to pursue strength training, bodybuilding, etc.?
 

Kaido

Elite Member & Kitchen Overlord
Feb 14, 2004
49,992
6,301
136
Originally posted by: brikis98
Let me give this one a shot, as I do think it's a fair question.

This is a bit obvious, but the "point" of Starting Strength is to teach you the most effective way to do strength training. Wikipedia defines strength training as "the use of resistance to muscular contraction to build the strength, anaerobic endurance and size of skeletal muscles". The SS book brings up the most important lifts to do (esp. for beginners), shows you how to do the lifts properly, and lays out a strength training program that will work wonders for novices. Originally, it was built as an instruction manual for coaches, but the 2nd edition has changed the focus to actual weight lifters themselves. It is simply a guide to one of the best known systems for building strength.

Now, that takes care of the book. The next question you'll ask then is "why do strength training" or perhaps more importantly, "what are the benefits of increasing strength"? This is a slightly different question with many, many answers. The same Wikipedia article has a benefits of strength training section which has a decent list:

The benefits of weight training include greater muscular strength, improved muscle tone and appearance, increased endurance, enhanced bone density, and improved cardiovascular fitness.

Many people take up weight training to improve their physical attractiveness. Most men can develop substantial muscles; most women lack the testosterone to do this, but they can develop a firm, "toned" (see below) physique, and they can increase their strength by the same proportion as that achieved by men (but usually from a significantly lower starting point). Ultimately an individual's genetics dictate the response to weight training stimuli to some extent.

The body's basal metabolic rate increases with increases in muscle mass, which promotes long-term fat loss and helps dieters avoid yo-yo dieting. Moreover, intense workouts elevate the metabolism for several hours following the workout, which also promotes fat loss.

Weight training also provides functional benefits. Stronger muscles improve posture, provide better support for joints, and reduce the risk of injury from everyday activities. Older people who take up weight training can prevent some of the loss of muscle tissue that normally accompanies aging?and even regain some functional strength?and by doing so become less frail. They may be able to avoid some types of physical disability. Weight-bearing exercise also helps to prevent osteoporosis. The benefits of weight training for older people have been confirmed by studies of people who began engaging in it even in their 80s and 90s.

Stronger muscles improve performance in a variety of sports. Sport-specific training routines are used by many competitors. These often specify that the speed of muscle contraction during weight training should be the same as that of the particular sport.

Though weight training can stimulate the cardiovascular system, many exercise physiologists, based on their observation of maximal oxygen uptake, argue that aerobics training is a better cardiovascular stimulus. Central catheter monitoring during resistance training reveals increased cardiac output, suggesting that strength training shows potential for cardiovascular exercise. However, a 2007 meta-analysis found that, though aerobic training is an effective therapy for heart failure patients, combined aerobic and strength training is ineffective.

One side-effect of any intense exercise is increased levels of dopamine, serotonin and norepinephrine, which can help to improve mood and counter feelings of depression

If any of the above benefits interest you, the Starting Strength book is a great way for beginners to achieve them.

Now, the last important thing to discuss: how does the SS approach differ from other routines? Most routines that involve any kind of resistance training share many of the same principles and benefits of SS. The difference is that they may not focus on building sheer strength, but on something else. Moreover, most routines come with a recommended diet which will also greatly affect the results. SS with a massive calorie surplus (such as the recommended 1 gallon of milk a day) will produce HUGE gains in muscle mass and strength. SS with a calorie deficit (but sufficient protein intake) will allow a person to lose body fat and maintain muscle mass.

* For example, body building is concerned only with aesthetics - that is, the size, mass and definition of the muscles. The best exercises to accomplish this (especially for beginners) are still largely the same as described in SS, but the number of sets, reps, weight progression, and diet are geared towards muscle hypertrophy instead of strength gain. Of course, strength gain will still occur, but it is almost a side effect of body building. This is why Arnold (a body builder), despite the larger looking muscles, is nowhere near as strong as Andy Bolton, one of the worlds strongest powerlifters (deadlifting 1003lbs in the picture).

* Powerlifting, incidentally, is strength training through and through: the goal there is to gain as much strength as possible so as to lift the maximum amount of weight in certain lifts (deadlift, squat, bench).

* Olympic lifting is strength training focused around a different set of lifts: the clean & jerk and the snatch.

* Crossfit style routines are "by design, broad, general, and inclusive". CrossFit maintains that proficiency is required in each of 10 fitness domains: cardiovascular/respiratory endurance, stamina, strength, flexibility, power, speed, agility, balance, coordination, and accuracy. So, Crossfit routines include components to boost your strength, but as it's only one of the 10 domains, they also include components to work on the other 9.

* As alluded to earlier, routines built around losing fat usually use weight training not as a means to increase strength (which is quite difficult to do while cutting) but rather as a way to maintain muscle mass. In fact, many dieters use the SS routine not to become stronger, but actually to prevent themselves from getting weaker.

Anyways, there are countless routines out there and they each have different focuses and hence, different benefits. In general, you want to pick the one that most closely aligns with your desired goals, which you should have figured out beforehand in very concrete, measurable terms.

Now, to bring it back to the book. It is my personal opinion that SS is so highly recommended on this forum because it is probably THE most effective routine for beginners regardless of what goal they are seeking. If you have never done resistance training before, jumping into a body building or power lifting routine can be a bad idea. Many of those routines are built for lifters that already have a solid base of muscle, strength and other adaptations. And be careful, some routines out there (esp BB routines) that work for the "pros" are only effective when backed up with massive amounts of steroids & other performance enhancers. Anyways, SS is useful because it lays down a terrific strength training foundation that can prepare you for any of the outer routines. Most people stick with it only for a year or two before the linear progression becomes ineffective, at which point they are ready to move on to a more advanced program and one that is more specific to their goals.

Awesome post, A+! :D That's exactly the kind of response I was looking for, especially your bolded statement near the end:

It is my personal opinion that SS is so highly recommended on this forum because it is probably THE most effective routine for beginners regardless of what goal they are seeking.

Right now I am out-of-shape and am working on losing weight so that I can start other forms of personal training without having to carry an extra 50+ pounds of blubber around. I've never been to a gym and the only exercise equipment I own are an exercise bike and an elliptical machine. Personally, focused strength-training activities like Powerlifting and Olympic lifting don't appeal to me at all; I'd rather end up looking like Arnold than Andy Bolton if I had a choice. This is one of the reasons I created this thread - from reading Starting Strength it seemed like the natural progression of things was to get into lifting competitively or as a hobby, which I am not interested in at all.

I would, however, like to have an improved physique instead of being a blob. So from reading the replies to this thread, it seems like following Starting Strength initially and then progressing into a body building routine seems like the way to go for that. That's exactly the kind of advice and information I was looking for - thank you! :)
 

aphex

Moderator<br>All Things Apple
Moderator
Jul 19, 2001
38,572
2
91
Originally posted by: skace
Originally posted by: crt1530
/facepalm

I've started writing about 6 different responses to the original post and some of the replies in this thread but after several paragraphs I start to realize that maybe crt's answer is the best.

So now, instead of educating, I'm just going to post all the phrases that annoy the piss out of me.

<snip>

Was there a purpose to your post then? If you can't think of anything constructive to add, why piss all over the OP? It just ends up making you look like a douche and does nothing to help the OP, who is obviously reaching out for help.