Could use a quick suggestion

[flinstones1]

Take a look. Guys Im just trying to set up a simple approach to make progress in size/strength as I have been doing HIT/DC/all the high intensity stuff  training recently and want to get away from training to failure nonstop my body is really taking a beating with it...and I personally feel that going to failure exposes further endrocine/cns stress which can be counterproductive.
. There will be workout a and workout b.
a. will be chest,shoulders,triceps,and back

b.Legs,biceps,forarms,abs.

So kinda like a DC setup except I train slightly more frequently and dont rest pause my sets and take them to failure all the time.

 every other day rotating between one and two. So training four times in 8 days what gets hit on monday gets hit on friday. wedsday gets hit on sunday...sunday's bodyparts hit on Thursday you get the point.

One excercise per bodypart, three heavy sets. The first set will be a money set. I will go for a rep pr or add weight. The other two sets will "try to match" the reps I got on the first set with the same weight.
So say I dumbell bench 130's for 8 reps on my first set(or try to) and get 9 for a pr. The next two sets will be the same weight trying to hit the same amount of reps to the best of my ability.
Seem pretty bulletproof? I mean pretty simple......Calories are all gonna be there so Im sure I dont want to make this rocket science, but would like some thoughts. Goals is to get bigger/stronger obviously.

[Yev33]

Thats actually very similar to what im doing now, except I have a pull,push,lower split and train four times a week. I also use the 3 work set approach, but I set up a range to fall into for total reps for all three sets. I need to get 16-25 reps for all sets combined with the same weight. If I fall short of 16 by the third set I will do a fourth. I use a 2 minute rest period between all work sets. The funny thing is, you will notice  that sets 2 and 3 will feel a lot stronger than the first one even though you won't be able to do as many reps, but you will feel that power groove a lot more. Its working very well for me, I think the key is keeping the volume low and upping the frequency from a traditional hitting each bodypart once a week. What's your idea for progression? At which point are you planning on upping the weights?

[LatsMcGee]

If you are trying to give the CNS a break you should consider moderate poundages for a while.  Try and use a few more unilateral exercises as well.  They are proven to be less taxing on the CNS. 

[flinstones1]

Thats actually very similar to what im doing now, except I have a pull,push,lower split and train four times a week. I also use the 3 work set approach, but I set up a range to fall into for total reps for all three sets. I need to get 16-25 reps for all sets combined with the same weight. If I fall short of 16 by the third set I will do a fourth. I use a 2 minute rest period between all work sets. The funny thing is, you will notice  that sets 2 and 3 will feel a lot stronger than the first one even though you won't be able to do as many reps, but you will feel that power groove a lot more. Its working very well for me, I think the key is keeping the volume low and upping the frequency from a traditional hitting each bodypart once a week. What's your idea for progression? At which point are you planning on upping the weights?

I like that idea. I would typically be very aggresive towards increasing poundages weekly I figure once I beat my previous best by two reps I will add 5-10 pound. Sa I rows 225 for 10 next workout will try to be for 12. If I hit twelve Ill go for 235 next time.

As for your second question, my plan is too hit the bodypart as frequently as possible. More times I can hit a part in a years time is more growth phases I can get.
As or you what Im guesssing is that you do sort of three sets and the three sets have to hit a given rep range, if the rep range is not hit in three sets, youll add a fourth set.
Seems like a good idea as well I shall add that too.

[flinstones1]

If you are trying to give the CNS a break you should consider moderate poundages for a while.  Try and use a few more unilateral exercises as well.  They are proven to be less taxing on the CNS.  

Not so much CNS stress currently, but after researching many studies and stuff, Im finding that going to failure is unecessary for several reasons.
-failure is irrelevant, it is the amount of intensity generated that is the only relevant factor.
-* Training to failure results in more muscle fiber microtrauma. This may result in a greater growth stimulus than stopping sets shy of failure. However, excessive microtrauma and degradation may partially offset the growth stimulus and blunt the anabolic response, not producing a net anabolic effect any greater than stopping sets short of failure.


* Several set protocols produce greater anabolic hormone release than single set protocols.

Its time to move with this going to failure bullshit.

[flinstones1]

The most important things in training are as follows i believe.
-Hit the bodypart as frequently as possible
-Use progressive heavier and heavier weights to continue to stress the muscle
-Lift hard but shy of failure so the CNS/endrocine system avoids systematic fatigue
-By the way I have no doubt in my mind a few brutually heavy sets will fatigue the muscle far far greater than simply talking one set to failure.

[LatsMcGee]

Not so much CNS stress currently, but after researching many studies and stuff, Im finding that going to failure is unecessary for several reasons.
-failure is irrelevant, it is the amount of intensity generated that is the only relevant factor.
-* Training to failure results in more muscle fiber microtrauma. This may result in a greater growth stimulus than stopping sets shy of failure. However, excessive microtrauma and degradation may partially offset the growth stimulus and blunt the anabolic response, not producing a net anabolic effect any greater than stopping sets short of failure.


* Several set protocols produce greater anabolic hormone release than single set protocols.

Its time to move with this going to failure bullshit.

I agree with you,  personally I have made my best gains following Vince Gironda's 85% principle.  Vince was a big advocate of the training you are talking about,  he had most clients train upper body 3 days a week and lower body twice. 

[Yev33]

Well my main thing is to hit 16-25 reps in a given excercise with the same weight. 95% of the time I use weights that should allow me to do it in three sets, once the total reps for all three sets equals 25 or more I add more weight, for example tonight my BB shoulder press went like this set 1: 10, set 2: 8, set 3: 7. All of them combined equals 25 so next workout I will add 2.5%-5% more weight to it, which will drop me down to around set 1: 7 , set2: 5, set3: 4, and build back up again from there. Sometimes though I get a little overzealous with the weight selection usually when it's a new movement in my rotation and I go too heavy, I will add a fourth set so that I can complete at least 16 total reps, it looks pretty much like this set1 5reps, set2 4 reps, set3 4 reps, set4 3 reps, by next workout though I better be able to get at least 16 total in 3 sets. Generally I can add 3-5 total reps each workout, my cycles last 6 weeks after which I evaluate which movements are stagnating and need to be switched out and which ones should stay.  

[dyslexic]

-failure is irrelevant, it is the amount of intensity generated that is the only relevant factor.

Failure is not irrelevant. Define 'intensity'... and then tell me how you gauge the amount applied towards an objective relevance. Show me the data in the results. Let's concentrate on pure muscle growth.


You are making bold enough statements to almost rival the dogma of the late/great Mentzer familia.


I guarantee you that the amount of intensity generated is not even close to being the only relevance in this equation. You go on to state that: "This may result in a greater growth stimulus than stopping sets shy of failure. However, excessive microtrauma and degradation may partially offset the growth stimulus and blunt the anabolic response, not producing a net anabolic effect any greater than stopping sets short of failure". Did you copy and paste this from another wannabe know everything website?

You use the word "may" twice like maybe I'm reading the label on some bullshit supplement bottle that "may" help eliminate high cholesterol, or MAY reduce the risk of prostate cancer, or MAY be helpful in joint mobilization.


The only thing that comes to my mind when I read blanket statements like this is that you MAY easily be full of bullshit.


Do your time. Gather your empirical data. Learn how to speak to educated people who spend years researching and testing scientific theories. You MAY just learn something.