MAGAZINE PROMISES

MAGAZINE PROMISES
By Shane Robert

When I first started in fitness, the only real source of information available was lifting magazines. Sure, we had books. But most were not as accessible and plug-and-play as they are today. People loved to hate on the “muscle rags.” I know I spent my fair share of time ripping on the content of these magazines. I do, of course, agree that many of the cover claims were ridiculous. It wasn’t uncommon to see titles such as:

GAIN 30 POUNDS OF MUSCLE IN 15 WEEKS!!

I understand why they did this, even if it was a bit disingenuous. Would you read a magazine with the title page proclaiming the truth:

GAIN, PERHAPS, 5 POUNDS OF MUSCLE AND ONLY 2 POUNDS OF FAT WHILE PUTTING (POSSIBLY, WITH ENOUGH HARD WORK) 20 POUNDS ON YOUR LIFTS IN A MERE 6 MONTHS.

I probably wouldn’t buy a copy. Despite such a lame title, these are gains that, at my level of training, wouldn’t disappoint me. It was these outrageous claims, stacked against the supposed “program of the pros'' that would get you to the aforementioned goal, that most people criticized. They would state that the magazines would lead new lifters astray and utterly cripple them into over-training with programs that only a cheater steroid user could possibly handle. I disagree. 

To be clear, the program won’t deliver on its promise. No debate from me. Even the most gassed up bodybuilder can’t gain that much muscle in 15 weeks. On the other hand, at least the new lifters got started. How many great iron athletes got started because of reading some muscle rag? How many guys have been motivated by the pictures of human mountains within the glossy pages? How many trainees DID find a program in a magazine that they stuck to and, lo and behold, DID make great gains?

I can’t speak for everyone but I know the latter certainly applied to me. Muscle and Fitness published a program written by Jim Stoppani and someone else who’s name escapes me. I can’t remember the specifics of the program, but I believe it was essentially a 12 week linear periodization program that I think looked something like this:

Week 1: 12 - 15 reps of everything
Week 2: 9 - 11 reps of everything
Week 3: 8 - 10 reps of everything
Week 4: 5 - 7 reps of everything 

Repeat 3 times for a total of 12 weeks

If memory serves, I believe we were doing 3-5 exercises per body part for 3-4 sets of each movement. This means an average workout had close to 32-48 sets when divided among the 2-3 body parts we were doing. This was done at least 4 days per week, and part of me remembers it actually being 5.

I started this program when I was 20 after 3 years of consistent (stupid) training. Though not advanced, or even intermediate, I was by no means a beginner at this point.

It was this exact issue - January 2007

Guess what happened? 

I didn’t over-train and die.

I didn’t need to take a bathtub full of PED’s to get through it.

I made some of the best strength and muscle gains as I had before or since.

Most importantly, I learned a TON and it led me to seek out more advanced knowledge.

This is a long winded way of saying it’s better to do something that’s far from optimal than nothing at all. I see so many people searching for the optimal program to the point of paralysis and stagnation. Yes, the magazines lead some, or most, people astray, but it’s better to lose the path for a time than to never start down it. Learn from your mistakes, progress and become better. 

In the end, everything will work if you try hard enough. As long as it includes squats. 

P.S. If you, like me, still enjoy reading old magazine articles, you can’t do much better than The Tight Tan Slacks of Dezso Dan