Brad Thorn's gym training and physical philosophy.

[Bruce Ross]

Would like to see an opinion from Bruce Ross on this.
Bruce are you around?

I forwarded the link on to the Sydney Uni S & Cs this afternoon, Iltw, with the the following comments:

A few things I noted:

· The focus on the bench press and the fact that his bench press and squat poundages were the same. His squat numbers were not overly impressive.
· The amount of core work he was doing
· The fact that his calf set was 10 reps. I don’t think you can begin to activate the calf muscles with so few reps.


I didn't have to mention my bias against the bench because of its lack of specificity for rugby as they're well aware of it.
.

He's a very professional athlete in every way.

 

[en_force_er]

Aside from squats and deadlifts (the mirror in this video was in front of the squat rack/cage) - what else do you need mirrors for?

Anything involving any technique, there aren't many standing or sitting upright exercises that wouldn't be benefited by a mirror.

To cite examples so you know I'm not being purely argumentative, any kind of Olympic lift obviously needs a mirror, every kind of shoulder press exercise, and even an ego exercise like bicep curl can benefit from a mirror.

 

[I like to watch]

I forwarded the link on to the Sydney Uni S & Cs this afternoon, Iltw, with the the following comments:

A few things I noted:

· The focus on the bench press and the fact that his bench press and squat poundages were the same. His squat numbers were not overly impressive.
· The amount of core work he was doing
· The fact that his calf set was 10 reps. I don’t think you can begin to activate the calf muscles with so few reps.


I didn't have to mention my bias against the bench because of its lack of specificity for rugby as they're well aware of it.
.

He's a very professional athlete in every way.

Interesting, thanks.
When you say 10 reps is that 10 reps at any weight or just the poundage he was playing with?
Wouldn't it be great to get a few clones of him!

 

[axeset]

Anything involving any technique, there aren't many standing or sitting upright exercises that wouldn't be benefited by a mirror.

To cite examples so you know I'm not being purely argumentative, any kind of Olympic lift obviously needs a mirror, every kind of shoulder press exercise, and even an ego exercise like bicep curl can benefit from a mirror.

As someone who's trained in Olympic weightlifting, mirrors are generally frowned upon for all exercises, at least where I trained. The reasoning from my coach was that it would retard the development of your spacial awareness. Believe me, none of these exercises absolutely requires a mirror. I've been to four or five different weightlifting gyms across Australia and none of them used mirrors in training - obviously this was quite different to your standard commercial gym.

I've personally always found them distracting to the point of detriment.

Long-time lurker, so, uh... as you were.

 

[O_fer_awesome]

Very interesting vid that one! Some solid core exercises there.

Wish my gym had the same number of people as his, would be able to but a few circuits together...s'pose thats one of the perks of being a pro athlete!

 

[Bruce Ross]

Interesting, thanks.
When you say 10 reps is that 10 reps at any weight or just the poundage he was playing with?
Wouldn't it be great to get a few clones of him!

He's the sort of player who'd be valuable in any team. Hard as in uncompromising rather than hard as in intimidating as I see it.

Now with regard to calves. Humans evolved to walk long distances, to take thousands of steps each day, and the principal muscles involved are those of the calves. As a result I see them as being fundamentally different to most other muscle groups. You have to tire them to get the right sort of stimulation.

When I started doing body building at the age of 19 virtually on my own I weighed 60kg. Through a lot of hard work I built up to 85kg in four years. (9 stone 7 pounds to 13 stone 4 pounds in old money) There was a lot of experimentation involved and I loved doing calf work. A lot of it was doing donkey calf raises with a mate sitting on your back. Early on I started doing sets to failure, stopping when the muscles burned so much it felt as if they were cramping, and doing multiple sets.

Later on I used to do mainly two-legged standing calf raises without weights, doing sets of perhaps 200 reps. Gradually I built my calves up to 17" (43cm).

One of the legendary big-calf bodybuilders of the 'Fifties was Reg Park. In 1956 his measurements were: "Weight 230, Height 6'1", Arm 19", Calf 18", Thigh 28", Chest (normal) 52", Waist 32", Wrist 8", Neck 19", Forearm (gooseneck) 16"." I didn't know it at the time but Reg also did a huge number of reps for his calves.

Before writing this reply, I did some single-leg standing calf raises off a raised block. I easily did 70 reps on each leg. My calves are still 17" which I don't feel is too bad for age 74. So I feel I have some authority to speak about exercising calves and I'd be astounded if anyone can get real benefit from doing sets of 10 even with heavy weight.

If they're not burning they're not being worked.
.

 

[Train Without a Station]

As a fan of Arnold S' work, I've read something along the lines of what you are saying Bruce, however I've also been told that excessive calf hypertrophy can result in reduced speed. Any truth in that?

 

[Empire]

 

[Bruce Ross]

As a fan of Arnold S' work, I've read something along the lines of what you are saying Bruce, however I've also been told that excessive calf hypertrophy can result in reduced speed. Any truth in that?

The nearest I can come to answering that, TWiS, is that in my case "excess calf hypertrophy" didn't seem to add to my speed.

For a tight forward, on the other hand, having powerful calves can provide additional power and extension by plantar flexing, i.e., rising onto your toes. The muscles of the calves are potentially quite powerful and I would guess provide greater ankle stability.
.

 

[Empire]

Now, imagine that running at you... scary.

 

[Scarfman]

Welcome axe!

The other guy who does heaps of core is the boxer Many Pacquiao. Loves the core. Seems to help him, too.

 

[Bruce Ross]

Now, imagine that running at you... scary.

Probably not as scary as having Brad Thorn running at you, Empire. Most body builders are not particularly strong, carrying muscles that have no real function. Note in particular that they have over-developed quadriceps but very little glute development, and it is the glutes that really provide power.
.

 

[I like to watch]

He's the sort of player who'd be valuable in any team. Hard as in uncompromising rather than hard as in intimidating as I see it.

Now with regard to calves. Humans evolved to walk long distances, to take thousands of steps each day, and the principal muscles involved are those of the calves. As a result I see them as being fundamentally different to most other muscle groups. You have to tire them to get the right sort of stimulation.

When I started doing body building at the age of 19 virtually on my own I weighed 60kg. Through a lot of hard work I built up to 85kg in four years. (9 stone 7 pounds to 13 stone 4 pounds in old money) There was a lot of experimentation involved and I loved doing calf work. A lot of it was doing donkey calf raises with a mate sitting on your back. Early on I started doing sets to failure, stopping when the muscles burned so much it felt as if they were cramping, and doing multiple sets.

Later on I used to do mainly two-legged standing calf raises without weights, doing sets of perhaps 200 reps. Gradually I built my calves up to 17" (43cm).

One of the legendary big-calf bodybuilders of the 'Fifties was Reg Park. In 1956 his measurements were: "Weight 230, Height 6'1", Arm 19", Calf 18", Thigh 28", Chest (normal) 52", Waist 32", Wrist 8", Neck 19", Forearm (gooseneck) 16"." I didn't know it at the time but Reg also did a huge number of reps for his calves.

Before writing this reply, I did some single-leg standing calf raises off a raised block. I easily did 70 reps on each leg. My calves are still 17" which I don't feel is too bad for age 74. So I feel I have some authority to speak about exercising calves and I'd be astounded if anyone can get real benefit from doing sets of 10 even with heavy weight.

If they're not burning they're not being worked.
.

Huh, thanks for that. In terms of squats etc for large muscle groups is it still work to fail with big weights or no?
One other thing I meant to ask, you mentioned that chinning body weight x 2 is impressive for a big man, why is it harder for a big man?
BTW pretty impressive stuff from you, i'm not game to get on a step to see how i compare!

 

[Empire]

Probably not as scary as having Brad Thorn running at you, Empire. Most body builders are not particularly strong, carrying muscles that have no real function. Note in particular that they have over-developed quadriceps but very little glute development, and it is the glutes that really provide power.
.

I'd wager these two would though! Arnold and Reg Parker (and Franco Columbo) are a different breed to the bodybuilders that followed them.

Another bodybuilder/strongman is Mariusz Pudzianowski (who is also an avid supporter of Polish Rugby). That man could throw atlas stones around like pebbles.

However as usual Bruce, your point cuts to the point - Thorn would be terrifying!

 

[Jnor]

So why don't I ever see you wearing shorts, Bruce!?!

I found Thorn's bench:squat ratio a little surprising, is this kind of thing still the norm in S&C in the rest of the rugby world? With the Uni S&C's comments on core work, was that surprise he was doing so much, and is that positive or negative?

 

[cyclopath]

I gotta get an appointment with Bruce! My spindly calves are only 15.5" and I am a a pup at 44! But I was a poncy sprinter and back, so maybe there is no hope!
Great thread, by the way. Loving it.

 

[Bruce Ross]

Huh, thanks for that. In terms of squats etc for large muscle groups is it still work to fail with big weights or no?
One other thing I meant to ask, you mentioned that chinning body weight x 2 is impressive for a big man, why is it harder for a big man?
BTW pretty impressive stuff from you, i'm not game to get on a step to see how i compare!

Squatting to failure? God no! There are more than enough damaged backs already. I am still busily working to make profitable a business created to exploit a couple of machines I invented that deliver what the squat does but in a biomechanically efficient way. These machines can be used safely to failure, but in order to build the "large muscle groups" like the glutes and quads you need low reps.

When comparing big men and small men it is well to remember that the amount of work done in an exercise such as the chin is a function, inter alia, of the vertical distance through which the load has to be moved. A big man has longer arms and so his body plus attached weights has to be elevated much higher than is the case with a smaller man. The same would apply with exercises such as the squat. Decades ago, when I used to take an interest in weight lifting in the three lift and pre-needle-in-the-arm days, I noted that the percentage of bodyweight that could be lifted declined progressively and dramtically as the bodyweight classes increased.
.

 

[TOCC]

How do you police your form without mirrors? Mirrors are important gym tools that are misused by the egotistical.

Most mirrors are removed at the gym i use as well, it could also be argued that this is probably one of the elite fitness gyms in sydney as well..

Using mirrors you only usually get one angle of a workout, standing front on to a mirror whilst you do military press or squats doesn't isn't giving you a side profile which in a technique sense is critically important in those exercises. Maybe for those still developing their technique and physiological understanding of their own body mirrors are of a benefit, but for people who are serious about lifting and working out they are more of a distraction then benefit.

Give me a training partner over mirrors any day of the week

 

[Bruce Ross]

I'd wager these two would though! Arnold and Reg Parker (and Franco Columbo) are a different breed to the bodybuilders that followed them.

Another bodybuilder/strongman is Mariusz Pudzianowski (who is also an avid supporter of Polish Rugby). That man could throw atlas stones around like pebbles.

However as usual Bruce, your point cuts to the point - Thorn would be terrifying!

You are right, Empire, body builders of the early postwar decades were serious lifters. John Grimek who preceded Park and Steve Reeves competed for the US in weightlifting at the 1936 Olympics but defeated Reeves in a 1948 Mr Universe contest at the age of 38.

Arnold to a large extent represented the crossover. From what I have read he handled impressive poundages but was heavily into steroids. The "sport" since then has become a joke but we should remember that virtually all the basic strength exercises were invented by bodybuilders quite a few decades ago.
.

 

[The_Brown_Hornet]

Bruce I noted that (and I say this in the mostly manly way possible ) that Brad has a pretty big backside, something that you and I have agreed contributes considerably to power in an athlete. I like also that he focuses a lot on core, as I reckon that's overlooked in a lot of sportsmen.