Liverpool FC Forum

LFC2007 wrote:It's a common misconception that increase in size = increase in strength. It's not necessarily the case. Hence why you find professional bodybuilders twice the size of Olympic weightlifters, but who can lift significantly less. So, if certain players appear slimmer, they may not necessarily have lost muscular strength. Two types of muscle hypertrophy (growth): i) Sarcoplasmic (increase in cell fluid), ii) Myofibrillar (increase in myofibrils*). Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy will result in overall muscle size increase, but not an equal increase in strength. So, relating this back to the squad - the latter (myofibrillar hypertrophy) suits the training objectives of the squad more than the former, as we're looking for increases in strength, endurance, skill and speed. However, there clearly needs to be a base level of bulk in order to be effective (as you can only be so strong with a limited muscle size) - combining strength with a bit of bulk - which is needed to force players off the ball etc.  I think certain players lack the required level of bulk which is needed to be most effective, e.g. Lucas, Benayoun, Skrtel, Agger, Arbeloa.  However, I don't see the aforementioned players bulking up greatly as I think Rafa, and the fitness trainers, see increases in strength endurance, stamina, speed as more important training objectives. So, to sum up - Whilst a set level of bulk is needed, and a level of strength in order to 'guide' the bulk - it is because training to bulk up works against the most important training objectives, that makes it very difficult to get the correct balance.

I think it's safe to assume that the conditioning of the squad is being monitored quite closely - the club doctor intimated as much in an interview recently. The fitness trainers will be aware who's lost weight, who's gained weight, who's stayed the same. I think they'll also have done tests to assess the strength of the players. It simply depends on the objectives of the coaching team.




*(small fibres within muscle fibres)

Emerald Red wrote:

LFC2007 wrote:It's a common misconception that increase in size = increase in strength. It's not necessarily the case. Hence why you find professional bodybuilders twice the size of Olympic weightlifters, but who can lift significantly less. So, if certain players appear slimmer, they may not necessarily have lost muscular strength. Two types of muscle hypertrophy (growth): i) Sarcoplasmic (increase in cell fluid), ii) Myofibrillar (increase in myofibrils*). Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy will result in overall muscle size increase, but not an equal increase in strength. So, relating this back to the squad - the latter (myofibrillar hypertrophy) suits the training objectives of the squad more than the former, as we're looking for increases in strength, endurance, skill and speed. However, there clearly needs to be a base level of bulk in order to be effective (as you can only be so strong with a limited muscle size) - combining strength with a bit of bulk - which is needed to force players off the ball etc.  I think certain players lack the required level of bulk which is needed to be most effective, e.g. Lucas, Benayoun, Skrtel, Agger, Arbeloa.  However, I don't see the aforementioned players bulking up greatly as I think Rafa, and the fitness trainers, see increases in strength endurance, stamina, speed as more important training objectives. So, to sum up - Whilst a set level of bulk is needed, and a level of strength in order to 'guide' the bulk - it is because training to bulk up works against the most important training objectives, that makes it very difficult to get the correct balance.

I think it's safe to assume that the conditioning of the squad is being monitored quite closely - the club doctor intimated as much in an interview recently. The fitness trainers will be aware who's lost weight, who's gained weight, who's stayed the same. I think they'll also have done tests to assess the strength of the players. It simply depends on the objectives of the coaching team.




*(small fibres within muscle fibres)

You beat me to it. Was about to say something similar, but no need now. It's an actual fact that when you see those massively freakish body builders on stage flexing their sh*t, it's true that they are in fact at their weakest. They look strong and scary, but you'd probably beat them at an arm wrestling contest. Not sure how it works, but they practically cause their bodies to crash and dehydrate themselves to get the skin all tight. Strength basically just comes from conditioning. You don't have to be massive. Me personally, I'd rather have our players light and agile, as well as having the sufficient strength in certain areas.

Recently I hadn't kicked a ball in about a year and a half. Always kept myself active with weights, though; but when I got to playing football again, the extra mass I'd put on made it a struggle for me. I was nowhere near as quick as I used to be, and I hated it. That's just from gaining an extra stone.

LFC2007 wrote:It's a common misconception that increase in size = increase in strength. It's not necessarily the case. Hence why you find professional bodybuilders twice the size of Olympic weightlifters, but who can lift significantly less. So, if certain players appear slimmer, they may not necessarily have lost muscular strength. Two types of muscle hypertrophy (growth): i) Sarcoplasmic (increase in cell fluid), ii) Myofibrillar (increase in myofibrils*). Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy will result in overall muscle size increase, but not an equal increase in strength. So, relating this back to the squad - the latter (myofibrillar hypertrophy) suits the training objectives of the squad more than the former, as we're looking for increases in strength, endurance, skill and speed. However, there clearly needs to be a base level of bulk in order to be effective (as you can only be so strong with a limited muscle size) - combining strength with a bit of bulk - which is needed to force players off the ball etc.  I think certain players lack the required level of bulk which is needed to be most effective, e.g. Lucas, Benayoun, Skrtel, Agger, Arbeloa.  However, I don't see the aforementioned players bulking up greatly as I think Rafa, and the fitness trainers, see increases in strength endurance, stamina, speed as more important training objectives. So, to sum up - Whilst a set level of bulk is needed, and a level of strength in order to 'guide' the bulk - it is because training to bulk up works against the most important training objectives, that makes it very difficult to get the correct balance.

I think it's safe to assume that the conditioning of the squad is being monitored quite closely - the club doctor intimated as much in an interview recently. The fitness trainers will be aware who's lost weight, who's gained weight, who's stayed the same. I think they'll also have done tests to assess the strength of the players. It simply depends on the objectives of the coaching team.




*(small fibres within muscle fibres)

neil wrote:

LFC2007 wrote:It's a common misconception that increase in size = increase in strength. It's not necessarily the case. Hence why you find professional bodybuilders twice the size of Olympic weightlifters, but who can lift significantly less. So, if certain players appear slimmer, they may not necessarily have lost muscular strength. Two types of muscle hypertrophy (growth): i) Sarcoplasmic (increase in cell fluid), ii) Myofibrillar (increase in myofibrils*). Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy will result in overall muscle size increase, but not an equal increase in strength. So, relating this back to the squad - the latter (myofibrillar hypertrophy) suits the training objectives of the squad more than the former, as we're looking for increases in strength, endurance, skill and speed. However, there clearly needs to be a base level of bulk in order to be effective (as you can only be so strong with a limited muscle size) - combining strength with a bit of bulk - which is needed to force players off the ball etc.  I think certain players lack the required level of bulk which is needed to be most effective, e.g. Lucas, Benayoun, Skrtel, Agger, Arbeloa.  However, I don't see the aforementioned players bulking up greatly as I think Rafa, and the fitness trainers, see increases in strength endurance, stamina, speed as more important training objectives. So, to sum up - Whilst a set level of bulk is needed, and a level of strength in order to 'guide' the bulk - it is because training to bulk up works against the most important training objectives, that makes it very difficult to get the correct balance.

I think it's safe to assume that the conditioning of the squad is being monitored quite closely - the club doctor intimated as much in an interview recently. The fitness trainers will be aware who's lost weight, who's gained weight, who's stayed the same. I think they'll also have done tests to assess the strength of the players. It simply depends on the objectives of the coaching team.




*(small fibres within muscle fibres)

Hmmm yes re Hyppia we need to look at Abstract  Muscle strength and, to a greater extent, power inexorably decline with ageing. Quantitative loss of muscle mass, referred to as ldquosarcopeniardquo, is the most important factor underlying this phenomenon. However, qualitative changes of muscle fibres and tendons, such as selective atrophy of fast-twitch fibres and reduced tendon stiffness, and neural changes, such as lower activation of the agonist muscles and higher coactivation of the antagonist muscles, also account for the age-related decline in muscle function. The selective atrophy of fast-twitch fibres has been ascribed to the progressive loss of motoneurons in the spinal cord with initial denervation of fast-twitch fibres, which is often accompanied by reinnervation of these fibres by axonal sprouting from adjacent slow-twitch motor units (MUs). In addition, single fibres of older muscles containing myosin heavy chains of both type I and II show lower tension and shortening velocity with respect to the fibres of young muscles. Changes in central activation capacity are still controversial. At the peripheral level, the rate of decline in parameters of the surface-electromyogram power spectrum and in the action-potential conduction velocity has been shown to be lower in older muscle. Therefore, the older muscle seems to be more resistant to isometric fatigue (fatigue-paradox), which can be ascribed to the selective atrophy of fast-twitch fibres, slowing in the contractile properties and lower MU firing rates. Finally, specific training programmes can dramatically improve the muscle strength, power and functional abilities of older individuals, which will be examined in the second part of this review.

neil wrote:

LFC2007 wrote:It's a common misconception that increase in size = increase in strength. It's not necessarily the case. Hence why you find professional bodybuilders twice the size of Olympic weightlifters, but who can lift significantly less. So, if certain players appear slimmer, they may not necessarily have lost muscular strength. Two types of muscle hypertrophy (growth): i) Sarcoplasmic (increase in cell fluid), ii) Myofibrillar (increase in myofibrils*). Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy will result in overall muscle size increase, but not an equal increase in strength. So, relating this back to the squad - the latter (myofibrillar hypertrophy) suits the training objectives of the squad more than the former, as we're looking for increases in strength, endurance, skill and speed. However, there clearly needs to be a base level of bulk in order to be effective (as you can only be so strong with a limited muscle size) - combining strength with a bit of bulk - which is needed to force players off the ball etc.  I think certain players lack the required level of bulk which is needed to be most effective, e.g. Lucas, Benayoun, Skrtel, Agger, Arbeloa.  However, I don't see the aforementioned players bulking up greatly as I think Rafa, and the fitness trainers, see increases in strength endurance, stamina, speed as more important training objectives. So, to sum up - Whilst a set level of bulk is needed, and a level of strength in order to 'guide' the bulk - it is because training to bulk up works against the most important training objectives, that makes it very difficult to get the correct balance.

I think it's safe to assume that the conditioning of the squad is being monitored quite closely - the club doctor intimated as much in an interview recently. The fitness trainers will be aware who's lost weight, who's gained weight, who's stayed the same. I think they'll also have done tests to assess the strength of the players. It simply depends on the objectives of the coaching team.




*(small fibres within muscle fibres)

Hmmm yes re Hyppia we need to look at Abstract  Muscle strength and, to a greater extent, power inexorably decline with ageing. Quantitative loss of muscle mass, referred to as ldquosarcopeniardquo, is the most important factor underlying this phenomenon. However, qualitative changes of muscle fibres and tendons, such as selective atrophy of fast-twitch fibres and reduced tendon stiffness, and neural changes, such as lower activation of the agonist muscles and higher coactivation of the antagonist muscles, also account for the age-related decline in muscle function. The selective atrophy of fast-twitch fibres has been ascribed to the progressive loss of motoneurons in the spinal cord with initial denervation of fast-twitch fibres, which is often accompanied by reinnervation of these fibres by axonal sprouting from adjacent slow-twitch motor units (MUs). In addition, single fibres of older muscles containing myosin heavy chains of both type I and II show lower tension and shortening velocity with respect to the fibres of young muscles. Changes in central activation capacity are still controversial. At the peripheral level, the rate of decline in parameters of the surface-electromyogram power spectrum and in the action-potential conduction velocity has been shown to be lower in older muscle. Therefore, the older muscle seems to be more resistant to isometric fatigue (fatigue-paradox), which can be ascribed to the selective atrophy of fast-twitch fibres, slowing in the contractile properties and lower MU firing rates. Finally, specific training programmes can dramatically improve the muscle strength, power and functional abilities of older individuals, which will be examined in the second part of this review.

Or you could have just said, i know about that sh!t too. Do you honestly think anyone has the foggyist of ideas what your on about or are you just grabbing the chance to show off?   

Rush Job wrote:

neil wrote:

LFC2007 wrote:It's a common misconception that increase in size = increase in strength. It's not necessarily the case. Hence why you find professional bodybuilders twice the size of Olympic weightlifters, but who can lift significantly less. So, if certain players appear slimmer, they may not necessarily have lost muscular strength. Two types of muscle hypertrophy (growth): i) Sarcoplasmic (increase in cell fluid), ii) Myofibrillar (increase in myofibrils*). Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy will result in overall muscle size increase, but not an equal increase in strength. So, relating this back to the squad - the latter (myofibrillar hypertrophy) suits the training objectives of the squad more than the former, as we're looking for increases in strength, endurance, skill and speed. However, there clearly needs to be a base level of bulk in order to be effective (as you can only be so strong with a limited muscle size) - combining strength with a bit of bulk - which is needed to force players off the ball etc.  I think certain players lack the required level of bulk which is needed to be most effective, e.g. Lucas, Benayoun, Skrtel, Agger, Arbeloa.  However, I don't see the aforementioned players bulking up greatly as I think Rafa, and the fitness trainers, see increases in strength endurance, stamina, speed as more important training objectives. So, to sum up - Whilst a set level of bulk is needed, and a level of strength in order to 'guide' the bulk - it is because training to bulk up works against the most important training objectives, that makes it very difficult to get the correct balance.

I think it's safe to assume that the conditioning of the squad is being monitored quite closely - the club doctor intimated as much in an interview recently. The fitness trainers will be aware who's lost weight, who's gained weight, who's stayed the same. I think they'll also have done tests to assess the strength of the players. It simply depends on the objectives of the coaching team.




*(small fibres within muscle fibres)

Hmmm yes re Hyppia we need to look at Abstract  Muscle strength and, to a greater extent, power inexorably decline with ageing. Quantitative loss of muscle mass, referred to as ldquosarcopeniardquo, is the most important factor underlying this phenomenon. However, qualitative changes of muscle fibres and tendons, such as selective atrophy of fast-twitch fibres and reduced tendon stiffness, and neural changes, such as lower activation of the agonist muscles and higher coactivation of the antagonist muscles, also account for the age-related decline in muscle function. The selective atrophy of fast-twitch fibres has been ascribed to the progressive loss of motoneurons in the spinal cord with initial denervation of fast-twitch fibres, which is often accompanied by reinnervation of these fibres by axonal sprouting from adjacent slow-twitch motor units (MUs). In addition, single fibres of older muscles containing myosin heavy chains of both type I and II show lower tension and shortening velocity with respect to the fibres of young muscles. Changes in central activation capacity are still controversial. At the peripheral level, the rate of decline in parameters of the surface-electromyogram power spectrum and in the action-potential conduction velocity has been shown to be lower in older muscle. Therefore, the older muscle seems to be more resistant to isometric fatigue (fatigue-paradox), which can be ascribed to the selective atrophy of fast-twitch fibres, slowing in the contractile properties and lower MU firing rates. Finally, specific training programmes can dramatically improve the muscle strength, power and functional abilities of older individuals, which will be examined in the second part of this review.

Or you could have just said, i know about that sh!t too. Do you honestly think anyone has the foggyist of ideas what your on about or are you just grabbing the chance to show off?   

There's a slight difference, though, mate.  LFC2007 may be talking nonsense whereas Neil is most certainly talking out of his duodenem.

NANNY RED wrote:Well i understand you Neil its simple


The older you get the loss of different and workable muscle tissue,

You still go ten to the dozen though Nanny. 

Bamaga man wrote:

NANNY RED wrote:Well i understand you Neil its simple


The older you get the loss of different and workable muscle tissue,

You still go ten to the dozen though Nanny. 

Yeh i like to think i can still get a leg up at my age

NANNY RED wrote:

Bamaga man wrote:

NANNY RED wrote:Well i understand you Neil its simple


The older you get the loss of different and workable muscle tissue,

You still go ten to the dozen though Nanny. 

Yeh i like to think i can still get a leg up at my age