I visited one of the world’s top bodybuilding gyms, a training ground for mass monsters from around the globe. My mission: to see if these giants would accept science-based lifting advice from me, a significantly smaller, science-focused lifter. Many assume the biggest guy in the gym holds the best advice, but I wanted to challenge this notion.
I approached several bodybuilders, all significantly larger than myself, and asked if they’d be open to hearing my science-backed training tips. Surprisingly, most were receptive. They recognized that even within vastly different training approaches, valuable insights can be gleaned and applied. One bodybuilder even offered to demonstrate his lateral raise technique, allowing me to provide some targeted advice.
I suggested raising the cable pulley higher than hand height. This adjustment shifts the peak tension of the exercise. With the pulley at hand height, maximum tension occurs when the delt is most shortened. Raising the pulley allows for peak tension when the delt is fully stretched, maximizing muscle fiber recruitment. The bodybuilder acknowledged the logic and expressed interest in trying the modification.
Another bodybuilder, impressively large, agreed to demonstrate his bench press. He executed a raw bench press with 495 lbs, showcasing his immense strength. While I acknowledged his brute strength and impressive lift, I offered a critique based on the observation of limited leg drive. Suggesting he push the floor away while pressing the bar up and back, I questioned if this could potentially enhance power generation. He thoughtfully responded, acknowledging that minor adjustments requiring conscious thought can sometimes detract from the lift itself. This highlights the nuanced relationship between science-based principles and individual lifting styles.
Bodybuilder bench pressing heavy weight
Observing a female bodybuilder’s back exercise provided a perfect example of textbook form. Her controlled tempo, squeezing her mid-traps at the top and emphasizing the negative portion of the movement, demonstrated a deep understanding of muscle activation and hypertrophy. She highlighted the importance of the negative, where muscle fibers are stretched under tension, a key driver of muscle growth. This reinforced the idea that proper form, even with lighter weight, can be more effective than sloppy form with heavier loads.
I then spoke with a massive bodybuilder, weighing 345 lbs, about his pull-up technique. He demonstrated excellent range of motion and control, two crucial elements of effective lifting. He also utilized assisted pull-ups, acknowledging that even for someone his size, assistance can improve the mind-muscle connection. We discussed how assistance can force stricter form and reduce momentum, leading to greater lat activation. I did suggest a minor adjustment, recommending a more upright posture to further isolate the lats, as opposed to leaning back which incorporates more mid-trap involvement.
A bodybuilder performing assisted pull ups
A final conversation with a bodybuilder focusing on leg development yielded valuable insights into training frequency and volume. He trained legs twice a week, performing around 10 sets each session, totaling 20 sets per week. This aligns with research suggesting optimal training volume for muscle growth. His technique was flawless, demonstrating proper depth and maintaining a stable torso. This highlighted the importance of prioritizing proper form over excessive weight.
My interactions with these elite bodybuilders demonstrated that even at the highest levels of the sport, there’s an openness to learning and refining technique. While individual approaches vary, the underlying principles of science-based lifting remain relevant. This experience challenged the assumption that bigger is always better when it comes to lifting advice, demonstrating that valuable knowledge can come from diverse sources.
