Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: Ursus on August 19, 2010, 01:16:23 PM
-
If possible can you also post a pic with your answer.
-
Yep. Works a charm.
-
Nope.
No pic, I'm still fat.
-
I never fail so fuck that! >:(
-
very clever way to acquire masturbation material
-
very clever way to acquire masturbation material
lol!
-
i worked out once.....i started to sweat so i figured i was allergic to it and quit...
bench
-
depends what you mean by failure
-
Usually a rep range I have in mind before I work the set.
-
Just keep reppin away till u cant do anymore, pretty simple, why would anyone quit before it hurts? ::)
-
i never train to failure its opens doors to fail in life
-
Depends on what you mean by failure. Relative failure or absolute failure?
I think training to failure is kind of overrated anyway, anybody can grab a bar and do reps until they can't do another one, but not stimulate anything for muscle growth.
-
Pugilist666 and I were just talking about this the other day as we finished our leg workout where we were squatting 860 lbs for reps. I went to failure but pug... there was no failure, boredom would set in and he would eventually stop.
-
Train to failure on certain body parts chest back shoulders
-
Never. I tried it once for laughs, of course with dumbbell curls. ;D I did 9 sets, and the strength decrease was huge. The weight for my last set was 37 % of the weight of the first set. :-\
-
By failure I mean e.g bench pressing 300lbs for 8 reps. No help from spotter etc and you cannot do another one.
-
good question goudy/ursus. i am confused about failure as well. for a while i stayed away from failure completely, not one set to fialure, and my stamina-strength (ability to do mulitple sets with heavy weight) increased greatly, and i got good gains too. but i feel like failure is good too, just finding the right balance is hard. too many sets to failure and i feel like your just demolishing the body, and its not gonna grow from that. i dont get stronger if im demolishing my body with too many sets to failure. i think dorian yates style of training can be very effective if you can limit yourself to just one set per exercise and really push yourself to the limit on that one set... other wise i think staying away from fialure is better, just keep the weights hevay and good form, stop at least 2 reps shy of fialure.
-
i worked out once.....i started to sweat so i figured i was allergic to it and quit...
bench
No way! you too ?!?!
I had to stop after 5 minutes and get some cold water..
-
By failure I mean e.g bench pressing 300lbs for 8 reps. No help from spotter etc and you cannot do another one.
By that definition I go to failure on all my work sets.
-
Training to failure only works if you're on gear, it's not designed for naturals.
Training that intense completely tears down the muscle, without an anabolic agent to recuperate it overnight your screwing yourself over.
-
this guy trains to failure in everything he does:
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOM
-
this guy trains to failure in everything he does:
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOM
I'll bet $100 that thai whore has a penis
-
I'll bet $100 that thai whore has a penis
$100 ? is that all - lets be honest its 100% guaranteed, its no secret he loves cock.
-
Training to failure only works if you're on gear, it's not designed for naturals.
Training that intense completely tears down the muscle, without an anabolic agent to recuperate it overnight your screwing yourself over.
where do you come up with the stuff you post? i get that this is your current opinion, but your stating it like fact- and its far from it. in fact i might even go out on a limb and say that naturals are bteer suited for training to failure and juicers should stay away- naturals need to force their muscles to grow while juicers can stay away from failure and do more volume.
that being said, naturals and juicers shoudl train the same- heavy, good form, 6-10 reps upper body 10-20reps lower body, stay out of the gym untill your muscle has recuperated.
the question is how many total sets, how many sets per exercise, go to failure or not, and if goig to failure how many times per workout, and does that effect the amount of sub-failure training you can do in addition to the sets to failure.
-
LOL at some of your responses especially the first couple...
I train to failure pretty often thats a round about way that I judge my progress. If I can get 10 reps with a certain weight and 8 is my goal then Im going to increase the weight until I can only get around 8 and try to work my way back to 10 and then increase again...
I have a number of reps in mind for each set and if I consistantly achieve that goal or surpass that goal I will raise the weight back to where I cant get another rep over my goal at a certain weight and try to get back up on reps.
so in that aspect ya I guess I train to failure but do I have a spotter sitting there every set no not at all maybe only for benches b/c i dont want to get stuck under the bar.
older pic Im a tad heavier now been eating like shit, lifetime natural
-
I train every bodypart to failure EVERY DAY
1 set per bodypart. All out. 2 workouts, one morning, one evening.
All bodyweight exercises also. Works great.
-
I train to failure on the last set of nearly all exercises....pretty much Dorian Yates style; 1-3 warm ups followed by one all out set.
-
I train every bodypart to faliure EVERY DAY
1 set per bodypart. All out. 2 workouts, one morning, one evening.
All bodyweight excersises also. Works great.
hahahahaha epic fail
and i dont mean your sets
-
hahahahaha epic fail
and i dont mean your sets
spelling Nazi >:(
-
spelling Nazi >:(
hahaha i was talking about ur workout - not your spelling ( poor as it is)
-
if i train to failure the rest of my workout is fucked- it will kill my strength and cause a huge , tight, burning pump that doesnt allow heavy weight or high reps. if i stop short of failure i can lift more weight, do more sets, more reps, my workout is 3-4 times longer with weights i only would only use during that one failure set othwerwise.
-
if i train to failure the rest of my workout is fucked- it will kill my strength and cause a huge , tight, burning pump that doesnt allow heavy weight or high reps. if i stop short of failure i can lift more weight, do more sets, more reps, my workout is 3-4 times longer with weights i only would only use during that one failure set othwerwise.
Training to failure works best with a workout partner and with lots of drop sets! I swear drop sets make the difference between looking like a bodybuilder and looking like a permabuilker.
-
if i train to failure the rest of my workout is fucked- it will kill my strength and cause a huge , tight, burning pump that doesnt allow heavy weight or high reps. if i stop short of failure i can lift more weight, do more sets, more reps, my workout is 3-4 times longer with weights i only would only use during that one failure set othwerwise.
its cause you likely workout like a female....remember, it takes more than heavy weights to do this shit right....
bench
-
Something I just thought of: anyone ever see someone train to failure on the angled leg press? That is, the person actually missing his last rep? I seriously can't recall ever seeing it.
Failure is such such a subjective term. One persons failure is where another could have squeezed out another 1-2 reps, even being of equal strength. :D One person who always looked like he really squeezed everything out of his sets is Rich Gaspari, just from the short clips I've seen of him training. There's some new clips on MD where he trains and he looks like someone whose "failure" point is higher than most.
There can also be a 100% difference in how taxing the last possible rep on a set is, depending on how long you had to really strain for example. And of course, rope pushdowns to failure aren't very taxing whereas a deadlift 1-2 reps from failure can be a 1000% more taxing.
What matters is progress. Load and/or reps with same load. Nothing special happens at the failure point, unlike what Mentzer claimed.
-
Something I just thought of: anyone ever see someone train to failure on the angled leg press? That is, the person actually missing his last rep? I seriously can't recall ever seeing it.
Failure is such such a subjective term. One persons failure is where another could have squeezed out another 1-2 reps, even being of equal strength. :D One person who always looked like he really squeezed everything out of his sets is Rich Gaspari, just from the short clips I've seen of him training. There's some new clips on MD where he trains and he looks like someone whose "failure" point is higher than most.
There can also be a 100% difference in how taxing the last possible rep on a set is, depending on how long you had to really strain for example. And of course, rope pushdowns to failure aren't very taxing whereas a deadlift 1-2 reps from failure can be a 1000% more taxing.
What matters is progress. Load and/or reps with same load. Nothing special happens at the failure point, unlike what Mentzer claimed.
i have done that before.......not a good feeling...
bench
-
i have done that before.......not a good feeling...
bench
LOL ive thrown my back out on a leg press machine...talk about feeling like a puss ;D
-
LOL ive thrown my back out on a leg press machine...talk about feeling like a puss ;D
me and my training partner have had to carry each other outside before because of shit like this.......passing out at the gym should not be frowned upon GOLDS!!!!!.....bunch of assholes at that place....a man cant even pass out at the gym anymore...
bench
-
BOOM
What matters is progress. Load and/or reps with same load. Nothing special happens at the failure point, unlike what Mentzer claimed.
-
if i train to failure the rest of my workout is fucked- it will kill my strength and cause a huge , tight, burning pump that doesnt allow heavy weight or high reps. if i stop short of failure i can lift more weight, do more sets, more reps, my workout is 3-4 times longer with weights i only would only use during that one failure set othwerwise.
How long are your sets time wise? Odd how training to failure would drain you so badly.
-
What matters is progress. Load and/or reps with same load. Nothing special happens at the failure point, unlike what Mentzer claimed.
I think so too. I have a target number of reps in mind for every set, if I reach it I stop. Sometimes this means going to failure, sometimes not. If I get stuck on the same weight/reps for a while I get discouraged so I like being able to do one more rep or five more lbs or whatever each workout.
This was six months ago, I'm a little bigger now but not much (pic)
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=318324.msg4563800#msg4563800
-
Failure is such such a subjective term. One persons failure is where another could have squeezed out another 1-2 reps, even being of equal strength.
Arnold talked bout going past the "pain barrier" and doing those last few reps that are so fucking painfull and/or hard.
-
there is only percieved failure, true failure is impossible. when you fail is mostly determined by muscle size/strength/stamina, and then muscle glycogen levels, and of course a previously exhausted muscle will not be as strong as a fresh one. outside of those determining factors is the mental factor, the reason why there is only percieved failure. the strength potential in your muscles is basically limitless. m=mc2 after all..
-
I train to failure... Not EVERY set, but ALMOST every set! My work out are usually 25-30 sets per bodypart!
-
BOOM
wow...so you found the secret?....why arent you a coach?....or training at the olympic center?...oh, thats right, you are close minded and talk out of your ass...
again...this shit isnt set in stone....you think a lot about this stuff, but you never expand your mind to other ideas.....your tunnel vision will be your crutch, and downfall...
bench
-
I train to failure... Not EVERY set, but ALMOST every set! My work out are usually 25-30 sets per bodypart!
That's how it should be: high volume and high intensity. All this Mentzer/HIT training is crap.
-
That's how it should be: high volume and high intensity. All this Mentzer/HIT training is crap.
nonsense.
-
nonsense.
Well, if you like it that's fine, but in reality its all about high volume and high intensity.
In my experience low volume training is the worst of all and it works only for beginners.
-
Well, if you like it that's fine, but in reality its all about high volume and high intensity.
In my experience low volume training is the worst of all and it works only for beginners.
i disagree - and so does science.
does high volume, high intensity work - yes certainly.
it works even better with steroid users.
however is it optimal or efficient - no
-
i trained to failure for years and it worked great. i finally became one!!!
-
wow...so you found the secret?....why arent you a coach?....or training at the olympic center?...oh, thats right, you are close minded and talk out of your ass...
again...this shit isnt set in stone....you think a lot about this stuff, but you never expand your mind to other ideas.....your tunnel vision will be your crutch, and downfall...
bench
lmao @ how much im in your head.. what exactly are you bitching about anyways?? muscles respond to increased workload, that means more reps with the same weight or equal reps with more weight. nothing complicated about that.
-
lmao @ how much im in your head.. what exactly are you bitching about anyways?? muscles respond to increased workload, that means more reps with the same weight or equal reps with more weight. nothing complicated about that.
your mind will be the reason you are never able to compete....sad really...
bench
-
your mind will be the reason you are never able to compete....sad really...
bench
i think ill be just fine, thanks for the encouragement tho ;)
-
i disagree - and so does science.
does high volume, high intensity work - yes certainly.
it works even better with steroid users.
however is it optimal or efficient - no
Actually science agrees and supports the efficiency of high volume training.
-
Actually science agrees and supports the efficiency of high volume training.
well there are studies - meta analysis too - 4 spring to mind. 2 on strength and 2 on hypertrophy.
however they exclude a vast amount of studies that just so happen to disagree with their claims - either by choice or poor research by the authors.
i can also think of many many studies that claim 1 set is just as effective as 2 or more, for both hypertrophy and strength ;)
so i guess i should have said 'good science disagrees ' ;D
you are still wrong however as even the bad studies say moderate volume is more effective than high volume ;)
-
well there are studies - meta analysis too - 4 spring to mind. 2 on strength and 2 on hypertrophy.
however they exclude a vast amount of studies that just so happen to disagree with their claims - either by choice or poor research by the authors.
i can also think of many many studies that claim 1 set is just as effective as 2 or more, for both hypertrophy and strength ;)
so i guess i should have said 'good science disagrees ' ;D
you are still wrong however as even the bad studies say moderate volume is more effective than high volume ;)
You're right about studies always contradicting each other, but experience also showed me that volume training is the way to go. If low volume works for you, that's fine.
About the studie that showed moderate volume being better than high volume is a tricky one. I mean, what is moderate volume? What is high volume?
The thing is more volume is what's needed for optimal muscle growth, protein synthesis and increased workload capacity. What that may be depends on each individual, but the thing is that those studies show that low volume is not optimal for hypertrophy.
-
You're right about studies always contradicting each other, but experience also showed me that volume training is the way to go. If low volume works for you, that's fine.
About the studie that showed moderate volume being better than high volume is a tricky one. I mean, what is moderate volume? What is high volume?
The thing is more volume is what's needed for optimal muscle growth, protein synthesis and increased workload capacity. What that may be depends on each individual, but the thing is that those studies show that low volume is not optimal for hypertrophy.
i disagree.
list of importance for hypertrophy/strength:
1. load - the most important aspect to building strength and hypertrophy.
2. frequency - never work same muscle group more than 3 x a week - with numerous studies showing no/little difference between twice and three times per week.
3. volume - only do enough to stimulate the muscle to grow - any more and you are breaking down too much muscle, making it more metabolically costly to rebuild damage, burning excess calories, increasing cortisol, etc etc.
also what is optimal in your eyes ? to me if 1 set provides say 75% of potential strength and mass gains, with a 2nd set providing another 20% and a 3rd providing the last 5 %.
i'd personally only do 1 set, fuck doing 100% more work for a measly extra 20% of the reward, or 200% more work for and extra 25% .
these are made up numbers - however i have come across 2 studies that discuss numbers regarding how much extra strength/mass gains are obtained by more than 1 set.
-
i think ill be just fine, thanks for the encouragement tho ;)
trust me bro...i have seen your pics after over a year of AAS use......i wouldnt even call you big for a natural...
bench
-
trust me bro...i have seen your pics after over a year of AAS use......i wouldnt even call you big for a natural...
bench
I'm sure you could post your pics and show us what beasts grace the front line in the law enforcement ::)
-
i disagree.
list of importance for hypertrophy/strength:
1. load - the most important aspect to building strength and hypertrophy.
2. frequency - never work same muscle group more than 3 x a week - with numerous studies showing no/little difference between twice and three times per week.
3. volume - only do enough to stimulate the muscle to grow - any more and you are breaking down too much muscle, making it more metabolically costly to rebuild damage, burning excess calories, increasing cortisol, etc etc.
also what is optimal in your eyes ? to me if 1 set provides say 75% of potential strength and mass gains, with a 2nd set providing another 20% and a 3rd providing the last 5 %.
i'd personally only do 1 set, fuck doing 100% more work for a measly extra 20% of the reward, or 200% more work for and extra 25% .
these are made up numbers - however i have come across 2 studies that discuss numbers regarding how much extra strength/mass gains are obtained by more than 1 set.
list of importance for hypertrophy/strength:
1. load - the most important aspect to building strength and hypertrophy.
2. frequency - never work same muscle group more than 3 x a week - with numerous studies showing no/little difference between twice and three times per week.
3. volume - only do enough to stimulate the muscle to grow - any more and you are breaking down too much muscle, making it more metabolically costly to rebuild damage, burning excess calories, increasing cortisol, etc etc.
1. I agree that progressive overload is the most important aspect to muscle growth, but the thing is doing more volume is another form of overload as you know strength gains will have a ceiling.
2. I pretty much agree with the frequency here, I personally like to train each muscle twice a week or twice every 8-10 days.
3. What is also important to know is that volume is another form of increasing overload on the muscle, so in my opinion its not a matter of doing just enough. Overtraining is a big myth in my opinion too.
Doing more volume also increases workload capacity which is important for growth.
also what is optimal in your eyes ? to me if 1 set provides say 75% of potential strength and mass gains, with a 2nd set providing another 20% and a 3rd providing the last 5 %.
i'd personally only do 1 set, fuck doing 100% more work for a measly extra 20% of the reward, or 200% more work for and extra 25% .
these are made up numbers - however i have come across 2 studies that discuss numbers regarding how much extra strength/mass gains are obtained by more than 1 set.
For me its optimal to do more than 1 work set per exercise/muscle. I tried low volume training in the past and got no results, I just ended with a very poor work capacity and no muscle gains. Then I learned about some studies made that showed that a high volume of work is needed to produce critical concetration of amino acids and subsequent protein synthesis to produce hypertrophy and started increasing my volume of training and the muscle growth gains were noticeable.
I like doing at least 10 work sets per bodypart going as high as 18, how many sets I do per exercise will depened on how many of them I do.
-
I'm sure you could post your pics and show us what beasts grace the front line in the law enforcement ::)
still stalking me all over the internet, i see.......i am so deep in your head its not even funny...
bench
-
still stalking me all over the internet, i see.......i am so deep in your head its not even funny...
bench
:D
oh yeah... I lose sleep over an annonymous police officer who calls himself "benchmaster" o getbig
-
:D
oh yeah... I lose sleep over an annonymous police officer who calls himself "benchmaster" o getbig
uh hum....."benchmstr"
;D
bench
-
uh hum....."benchmstr"
;D
bench
:D
-
3. What is also important to know is that volume is another form of increasing overload on the muscle, so in my opinion its not a matter of doing just enough. Overtraining is a big myth in my opinion too.
Doing more volume also increases workload capacity which is important for growth.
i disagree - as i stated there is a definite ceiling when it comes to volume - think of the bell curve - very applicable here. (tons of studies back me up here)
For me its optimal to do more than 1 work set per exercise/muscle. I tried low volume training in the past and got no results, I just ended with a very poor work capacity and no muscle gains.
do you realise how ridiculous you sound - you got no results from lifting heavy weight progressively because you only did 1 set ??? if this is true you must really have fucked up your frequency, caloric intake, intensity, ( load )
Then I learned about some studies made that showed that a high volume of work is needed to produce critical concentration of amino acids and subsequent protein synthesis to produce hypertrophy and started increasing my volume of training and the muscle growth gains were noticeable.
no, you did not find any such study. working out does not produce critical concentrations of amino acids, you are either lying or very very confused about this topic
I like doing at least 10 work sets per bodypart going as high as 18, how many sets I do per exercise will depened on how many of them I do.
good for you, i'm glad you have found a workout routine you enjoy. however is that routine optimal is another matter. you say you workout twice every 7-10 days - that alone suggests you are overtraining if it is taking you that long to recover between workouts. We clearly have vastly different ideas on frequency as i work the entire body every 48-96 hours max
-
trust me bro...i have seen your pics after over a year of AAS use......i wouldnt even call you big for a natural...
bench
your right.. im tiny.. show me how its done, bench :)
-
your right.. im tiny.. show me how its done, bench :)
Looks like the crystal meth is really helping out :D :D
-
your right.. im tiny.. show me how its done, bench :)
looking good tbombz
so tel us ..how do you strech your fascias ? ;D
-
Not all the time but yes.
-
your right.. im tiny.. show me how its done, bench :)
from that angle even a concentration camp survivor looks healthy.
-
Here are my thoughts.
I think that planned progressive overload is a fantastic thing. E.g I started off on bench 275x5x5 and each time I benched I added one rep. The next day it was 1x6 and 4x5, the next it was 2x6 3x5 etc etc until I got 5x10.
This however took an age. I also found I did not get particularly big on this principle. I often found that planning things too much was almsot negating my gains. There were some exercises where I could pile on the weighta dn I grew very quickly. I was hoever always pretty well rested on this and even the days I felt tired and/or weak I still managed to pull through.
One day I tried teh second biggest DB's in my gym. I only got like 4, 4, 3 with them. However the next day I got 5, 4, 4 etc I almost always gota rep or 2 on a set or two each week for pretty much half a year. It was great. I could however had microloaded using tiny plates and adjustable DB's. Had I done this I do not think I would be in the strength position I am in now. 2 weeks ago I tried teh biggest DB's in my gym as my primary exercise on shoulders. I got a 2x5 i was fried. Last week I got 7, 7, 6, 5. Today I got 8, 7, 7, 6. Clear progress. This was pretty much taking most sets near or two failure.
I also find that one way to progress when you do not think you can adda rep anymore on your heaviest set is to do a drop set. E.g I adopty this principle on bench press to great effect. Say i do 220x12 253x10 275x10 297x10 305x8 I may then drop down to a weight such as 286 and rep oyut. The first week I may only get 8. Then I will repeat this drop set each day until I get up to 10 reps. I then find I have increased my strength so I can go a little heavier on my top set.....
-
Had to continue here as my text was jumping all over the show.
I do find that this cannot be used too much. I did it on my shoulder press today and done a few unchallenging drop sets after my main BB pressing also. By getting stronger on the big lifts I find that this increases strength in the smaller lifts.
I rarely do drop sets on squats or deads simply as I feel it is dangerous. Espec high rep deadlifts.
Today barbell pressing my 3 heaviest sets were 230lbs x 5 reps. The last day i done 3x6x220. I will add a rep to each set over the coming weeks or sooner if I can until I am at 6-8 reps. This is a way of progressing without feeling like it is too regimented. Sometimes I will keep my heavy sets teh same weight but go slightly heavier on the warm up sets.
As a nattuie I feel that training to failure all the time is counter productive. I do not eat well enough or rest well enough to do it. MAYBE it would work well for me but i am a laid back person who enjoys training and I do not want it to become a chore. I am happy with it beinga pasttime. My hours of work are not suited to this training either.
Ultimatley I find that since I have adopted training with a few sets to near failure on a few major exercises my gains have been excellent and I have not been overtrianing (I trian 4x week)
I do believe that training in a totally and strictly regimented routine can work for size quite well, no doubt about it. However I feel that the approach works best on strength based objectives. For me I use a little intuition and try to lift heavier for more reps when I can. I hold back when I feel tired (Like I did on Wednesday doing back - chased a pump rather than heavy weights)
1-2 sets of failure and a drop set really improved my training. I think you should give it a ago sometime.
-
so goudy, what your saying is, "small and gradual progressive overload is good, but everyonce in a while you should make a big leap up in weight and force yourself to get a few sets" ?? right?
-
Failure trains to 240.
-
i disagree - as i stated there is a definite ceiling when it comes to volume - think of the bell curve - very applicable here. (tons of studies back me up here)
Fair enough, we can disagree here.
do you realise how ridiculous you sound - you got no results from lifting heavy weight progressively because you only did 1 set if this is true you must really have fucked up your frequency, caloric intake, intensity, ( load )
I'm just writing about my personal experience with low volume training and the thing is I got no results from it. I just ended up with a very poor work capacity and no gains.
And yes, I got no muscle growth from just 1 set, even when I was getting "stronger". This is why I think volume is important.
no, you did not find any such study. working out does not produce critical concentrations of amino acids, you are either lying or very very confused about this topic
I'm not lying. I think a guy named Behms did this study in 1995 called “Neuromuscular Implications and Applications of Resistance Training”. I don't have the entire study with me right now, but I remember I read it. This is a quote from it:
"Maximum strength training methods with their high intensity resistance but low volume of work do NOT elicit substantial muscle hypertrophy. Therefore a higher volume of work, (greater than 6 reps, with multiple sets) [emphasis and references are his] is needed to ensure a critical concentration of intracellular amino acids to stimulate protein synthesis” (Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 1995: p271)
good for you, i'm glad you have found a workout routine you enjoy. however is that routine optimal is another matter. you say you workout twice every 7-10 days - that alone suggests you are overtraining if it is taking you that long to recover between workouts. We clearly have vastly different ideas on frequency as i work the entire body every 48-96 hours max
This is the routine that gives me the best results and I don't think I'm overtraining. I can see you do whole body workouts with much higher frequency, I can tell you I tried the Arthur Jones style of low volume whole body workouts three times per week, but they did nothing for me. Not enough volume per bodypart.
-
so goudy, what your saying is, "small and gradual progressive overload is good, but everyonce in a while you should make a big leap up in weight and force yourself to get a few sets" ?? right?
Yea something along those lines.
Unless you have a strict %age routine for an upcoming comp/goal then I don't see why you can diverge and have some fun now and again. Small and gradual overload is good but we also sometimes can surprise ourselves by trying something we are not sure of and smoking it. Gives you confidence to keep going on and motivation also.
I think teh big leap up in weight(providing it is not absurdly large) can really stimulate new growth.
Just my $0.02
-
I'm not lying. I think a guy named Behms did this study in 1995 called “Neuromuscular Implications and Applications of Resistance Training”. I don't have the entire study with me right now, but I remember I read it. This is a quote from it:
"Maximum strength training methods with their high intensity resistance but low volume of work do NOT elicit substantial muscle hypertrophy. Therefore a higher volume of work, (greater than 6 reps, with multiple sets) [emphasis and references are his] is needed to ensure a critical concentration of intracellular amino acids to stimulate protein synthesis” (Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 1995: p271)
my mistake, sorry for calling you a liar.
The guy IS 100% wrong though as working out is not needed to ensure a critical concentration of aminos to stimulate synthesis - simply eating 20g of any complete protein is all thats required to maximally stimulate synthesis.
also his claim of high intensity/low volume not building muscle is wrong too - dorian yates ? jean pierre fux, mentzer, viator ? colorado experiment ? countless powerlifters etc
the guy may have simply been reading the 'mistaken' studies of the time.
like i said - i'm not saying high volume doesn't work, just that i do not believe its efficient.
-
my mistake, sorry for calling you a liar.
The guy IS 100% wrong though as working out is not needed to ensure a critical concentration of aminos to stimulate synthesis - simply eating 20g of any complete protein is all thats required to maximally stimulate synthesis.
also his claim of high intensity/low volume not building muscle is wrong too - dorian yates ? jean pierre fux, mentzer, viator ? colorado experiment ? countless powerlifters etc
the guy may have simply been reading the 'mistaken' studies of the time.
like i said - i'm not saying high volume doesn't work, just that i do not believe its efficient.
Panda, I've read several times now about the 20 grams of protein being the magic number needed to "flip the switch" of protein synthesis. I think maybe it was Layne that said he did some work on this also.
I'm curious as to if the 20 gram number is the threshhold amount to maximally turn on the machinery but more protein will be needed in addition to the 20 to maximally get to full recovery. Or is the 20 grams enough to turn on the machinery and achieve maximum muscular recovery?
And does that number apply to anyone, any size? Has the research gone that far yet?
If so, wouldn't that mean that even a 300 lber would only need 120 grams of protein a day? Is that where the research is leading us? Great news if it is.
And is there also a threshhold leucine amount that should also be met in the 20 grams?
Thanks.
-
failure every set. I adjust the weight so failure is at the number of reps i want to do.
-
the names of the main 2 new studies are on my first post of this thread 9 if you read through the thread i mention a few interesting studies that can/could back these 2 new ones up:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=345025.0
but basically the main one compares 5, 10 20, and 40g of protein and recorded synthesis rates, breakdown rates etc
it found that 20g ( actually slightly less than 20g) maximally stimulates protein synthesis, with a very small amount of the protein burned as energy. 40g stimulated synthesis the same, but much more was burned as energy (so just over 20g wasted - as it was treated like a carb and used for fuel)
the other study compared 30g of beef with 90g of beef - again synthesis rates were the same for both sizes, but the most of the 90g of beef was burned off as energy.
-
the names of the main 2 new studies are on my first post of this thread 9 if you read through the thread i mention a few interesting studies that can/could back these 2 new ones up:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=345025.0
but basically the main one compares 5, 10 20, and 40g of protein and recorded synthesis rates, breakdown rates etc
it found that 20g ( actually slightly less than 20g) maximally stimulates protein synthesis, with a very small amount of the protein burned as energy. 40g stimulated synthesis the same, but much more was burned as energy (so just over 20g wasted - as it was treated like a carb and used for fuel)
the other study compared 30g of beef with 90g of beef - again synthesis rates were the same for both sizes, but the most of the 90g of beef was burned off as energy.
Good thread, very interesting info.
-
my mistake, sorry for calling you a liar.
The guy IS 100% wrong though as working out is not needed to ensure a critical concentration of aminos to stimulate synthesis - simply eating 20g of any complete protein is all thats required to maximally stimulate synthesis.
also his claim of high intensity/low volume not building muscle is wrong too - dorian yates ? jean pierre fux, mentzer, viator ? colorado experiment ? countless powerlifters etc
the guy may have simply been reading the 'mistaken' studies of the time.
like i said - i'm not saying high volume doesn't work, just that i do not believe its efficient.
Its ok, no problem.
Like you said before, there are studies out there that contradict each other and also empirical results that show both high and low volume work. As far as the examples you gave, for every pro bb that supposedly grew on low volume there are MUCH more that grew on traditional high volume training. If you really want to look at pros, then most of them used/use high volume to grow.
Now, I said "supposedly grew on low volume" because many of them really didn't do it. Where you aware that Viator always did more volume during his time with Jones when the session was over or when Jones left the room? Viator said this and also said that when he trained with Mentzer back in the 70s, they would do twice as much work compared to what Mentzer would write about.
I just found that high volume works best for me, if low volume works for you that's great. I really can't take anything away form it, if its working for you.
-
the names of the main 2 new studies are on my first post of this thread 9 if you read through the thread i mention a few interesting studies that can/could back these 2 new ones up:
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=345025.0
but basically the main one compares 5, 10 20, and 40g of protein and recorded synthesis rates, breakdown rates etc
it found that 20g ( actually slightly less than 20g) maximally stimulates protein synthesis, with a very small amount of the protein burned as energy. 40g stimulated synthesis the same, but much more was burned as energy (so just over 20g wasted - as it was treated like a carb and used for fuel)
the other study compared 30g of beef with 90g of beef - again synthesis rates were the same for both sizes, but the most of the 90g of beef was burned off as energy.
This is very interesting information, thanks for posting it.
-
no problem jp.
glad you found it helpful.
it feels weird not to argue with someone on here, especially after attacking you.
Thank you for staying rational and polite.
attacking anyone who disagrees with me is a bad habit i have picked up here, as normally its an offensive defence :-[
sorry again for any offense.
-
Training to failure only works if you're on gear, it's not designed for naturals.
Training that intense completely tears down the muscle, without an anabolic agent to recuperate it overnight your screwing yourself over.
Training each bodypart once a week provides plenty of recoup for the natural bodybuilder, whether doing high volume or not.
Been a natty almost 19 years now. Never been on. I train each bodypart once a week.. a lot of sets going to failure. I completely believe this is the way a natural SHOULD train. As natty, you need to annihilate the targeted muscle and allow for recoup until the next week.
-
Yea something along those lines.
Unless you have a strict %age routine for an upcoming comp/goal then I don't see why you can diverge and have some fun now and again. Small and gradual overload is good but we also sometimes can surprise ourselves by trying something we are not sure of and smoking it. Gives you confidence to keep going on and motivation also.
I think teh big leap up in weight(providing it is not absurdly large) can really stimulate new growth.
Just my $0.02
cool, i tried that yesterday. it worked.
i think the key here is progressive overload, with periodized volume/failure/rep ranges. goign back and forth between periods of high volume/sub failure/mulitple rep ranges and periods of low volume/failure/low reps. whaddya think
-
When I smoke some weed I do some serious failure sets. I drop set for up to 5 sets sometimes.
I'll just lay out weights and lift them. Lift and not think about it. And just go until it burns badly.
It's not as interesting when I don't smoke weed though. And the same level of burn is tough to get when I'm not as focused.
The greatest thing about it is understanding that your mind is overcoming your body telling it to stop. When you push past that it's extremely satisfying. It become addicting.
-
cool, i tried that yesterday. it worked.
i think the key here is progressive overload, with periodized volume/failure/rep ranges. goign back and forth between periods of high volume/sub failure/mulitple rep ranges and periods of low volume/failure/low reps. whaddya think
sounds like hst.
which is a great system, gave me the best gains i ever had, i was the biggest i've ever been too.
but i burned out very badly.
-
sounds like hst.
which is a great system, gave me the best gains i ever had, i was the biggest i've ever been too.
but i burned out very badly.
actually i wasnt talking about anyting similar to hst. hadnt even looked into it befor eyou mentioned it. i have, and it looks like a good plan. you got burnt out on it? were you doing "strategic deconditioning" for 9-12 days every 2 months?? (taking a break from weights) were you doing a few high rep sets on each muscle every workout in order to prevent injuries??
-
If possible can you also post a pic with your answer.
Of course I go to failure. Why wouldn't I go to faiilure? You just make a set a lot more productive if you do the set to failure, and since the amount of glycogen in the muscles is limited, it makes sense to stimulate growth with as little sets as possible - because when glycogen runs out, the muscles don't use fat but the muscle tissue itself as a source of energy. But I don't believe in one set to failure.
SUCKMYMUSCLE
-
When I smoke some weed I do some serious failure sets. I drop set for up to 5 sets sometimes.
I'll just lay out weights and lift them. Lift and not think about it. And just go until it burns badly.
It's not as interesting when I don't smoke weed though. And the same level of burn is tough to get when I'm not as focused.
The greatest thing about it is understanding that your mind is overcoming your body telling it to stop. When you push past that it's extremely satisfying. It become addicting.
Very cool. Post of the day. 8)
-
cool, i tried that yesterday. it worked.
i think the key here is progressive overload, with periodized volume/failure/rep ranges. goign back and forth between periods of high volume/sub failure/mulitple rep ranges and periods of low volume/failure/low reps. whaddya think
I agree. When I smoke a few weeks of going real heavy then I will drop down to a less volume and/or sets even with teh same weight. The workouts are easy and fun and it gives my body a chance to recover without losing strength etc. Then I use it as a platform so that I can rebuild my previous levels of strength and size.
The longer and more I train the more I realise just how many tools are at my disposal. The ethos of my training however for size and strength is to get big and strong at the big basic movements and try to improve in the otehrs when/if I can.
-
I agree. When I smoke a few weeks of going real heavy then I will drop down to a less volume and/or sets even with teh same weight. The workouts are easy and fun and it gives my body a chance to recover without losing strength etc. Then I use it as a platform so that I can rebuild my previous levels of strength and size.
The longer and more I train the more I realise just how many tools are at my disposal. The ethos of my training however for size and strength is to get big and strong at the big basic movements and try to improve in the otehrs when/if I can.
Sticky this fucking thread
-
actually i wasnt talking about anyting similar to hst. hadnt even looked into it befor eyou mentioned it. i have, and it looks like a good plan. you got burnt out on it? were you doing "strategic deconditioning" for 9-12 days every 2 months?? (taking a break from weights) were you doing a few high rep sets on each muscle every workout in order to prevent injuries??
yes i was taking the break - just made me reset and go back to the strength i was at the start of the previous cycle. i don't agree with 'strategic deconditioning' (some shoddy science behind it) but i stuck to the plan.
same with the higher reps - hell i believe they were the reason i burnt out - those high rep sets killed me.
-
About 4 weeks ago on the biggest DB's in my gym I could shoulder press them for 4 sets of 4-6 reps
Today I got 1x9 2x8. i also did a drop set of 14 reps with the 105's. The drop set and working sets were both up from last week.
-
About 4 weeks ago on the biggest DB's in my gym I could shoulder press them for 4 sets of 4-6 reps
Today I got 1x9 2x8. i also did a drop set of 14 reps with the 105's. The drop set and working sets were both up from last week.
What is the poundage of the biggest db's?
-
What is the poundage of the biggest db's?
The pink ones go all the way up to 20 pounds. :)
-
There's NO way Ursus is doing the pink dumbbells for 8 reps and then drop setting with the 105's.
;D
-
What is the poundage of the biggest db's?
115lbs. They are thick handled which makes them feel trickier.
-
panda- were you going to failure on those high rep sets, or anywhere close? i think that your just supposed to do a few light sets and squeeze to get the blood pumping in there, not exhuast the muscle.
goudy/ursus- how many work sets do you usually do for each muscle, and how frequently do you train each muscle?
-
I now train each bodypart 1x week.
M - Chesta dn tris
T - Back and bis
Th - Shoulders and traps
F - legs and lowerback
I do favour high volume however I also lie to lift some big weights (relatively) if I can on 1-2 main exercises. The volume on shoulder and leg day isa little less and once I do my bread and butter exercises I do a lot of volume getting as much of a pump as I can.
E.g My main lifts on Chest and Tri day would be flat bench, incline bench, incline DB and weighted dips. I make up the other 3-4 exercises of pumpy stuff. Back day I go heavy on T-bars and bb rows then chase the pump with 3 other higher rep stuff, generally cable rows, wg pulldowns and maybe neutral grip pulldowns. Shoulders is DB and BB press and then leg day I generally squat and deadlift as my main exercise and then pyump uw with some front squats and lying leg curls.
The amount of sets I do on each day is around 35-50 and generally on most days apart from legs I will do around 350-400 reps.
-
oh wow i was expecting you to say you did lower volume training more frequently. what do you think of that style of training, for example, full body workouts 3 times per week with just one or two sets to failure per body part? (or a more moderate 2X per week with 2-4 sets per body part ?? )) have you tried this style of training, and how do you compare it to high volume training? are you going to failure on all those sets, if not, how many are to fialure?
thanks
-
panda- were you going to failure on those high rep sets, or anywhere close? i think that your just supposed to do a few light sets and squeeze to get the blood pumping in there, not exhuast the muscle.
goudy/ursus- how many work sets do you usually do for each muscle, and how frequently do you train each muscle?
the way hst works is you build up every workout till you reach your 15rm then 10rm then 5rm - te reps decrease as the weight increases.
you start the routine by working out your maxes i.e. 15rm, 10rm, and 5rm then reduce the weight by roughly 30+lbs - so say my 15rm was 100lbs, i would take 25lbs off that number and my first workout would be 75lbs for 15reps, the next workout 48 hours later would be 80lbs, and so on adding 5lbs each workout till you reach 105lbs - this would be your new rm at 15. then you change to your low 10rm weight. so if my old 10rm was 120lbs i would drop the weight to 95lbs, then 100, etc etc so that when i reach workout number 6 in that rep range i'd have added 5lbs to it i.e. 125lbs, and then drop to the 5rm weight etc etc
the thing was it workout really really well, you do get bigger, even on low calories, but when you took the strategic deconditioning you would lose any strength gains you made and your cycle would start back at the same weights. also by the the of the cycle you feel like death. Overtraining seriously kicked in with me, i found i was getting weaker over time, colds and flus hit me far far too often. i couldn't even have a few beers without being ill for days.
saying that, it is a very very impressive system.
i also did more sets than 1 for each exercise i.e.
i used to do 1 set for 15's as they killed me.
i did 2 sets of 10's.
i did 2 sets of 5's
i also found it was better to rotate the 15, 10 and 5 weights every day of the week i.e. instead of lifting 15rm weights for 6 workouts in a row, i would do my lightest 15rm workout on monday, on wed i would do my lightest 10 rm, and fri my lightest 5rm, then mon back to the workout 2 of the 15rm weight, etc etc this helped a great deal, and is much better for recovery and strength as you are lifting heavier weight on the fri of every week. however the catch was at the end of the cycle you are hitting failure in all rep ranges all in the same week, and in fact normally hit it the week before often too ( that happened with my modified system and the original).
if you are interested i would certainly try it - it does work, and works well.
if you take gear i imagine it is very very effective ;)
i was my biggest when on that routine, i had 19" arms and hadn't touched gear.
i do plan on going back as my current routine is very similar, only very much focused on the basic compound movements.
also the amount of studies that show no difference between 2 and 3 workout a week made me stick to 2 days a week rather than 3. i do wonder though if proper pre/post workout nutrition would make 3 a week more effective than twice a week. the studies weren't taking pre/post workout nutrition.
just some food for thought.
the hst site is:
http://www.hypertrophy-specific.com/hst_index.html
it has a good explanation of the system and the science behind its creation if you look.
-
oh wow i was expecting you to say you did lower volume training more frequently. what do you think of that style of training, for example, full body workouts 3 times per week with just one or two sets to failure per body part? (or a more moderate 2X per week with 2-4 sets per body part ?? )) have you tried this style of training, and how do you compare it to high volume training? are you going to failure on all those sets, if not, how many are to fialure?
thanks
I used to train 6x week or hit a bodypart 3x in 2 weeks it worked out as. I found that if I felt tired or weak my day in the gym suffered. It sucked. I also found Itgot niggly injuries more etc and never really gave my body a break. Also my gym is only open 6x week so if I took a day off it really threw me and I couldn't afford to miss a day as back when I done this I was younger and a bit of a gym obsessed fag.
I have never done fb workouts that way. TBH I do not think that 1-2 sets to failure would stimulate muscle growth for me. I have no experience of this so I may sopund silly when I say this but I just dont think ity would.
I have however done full body workouts before. Basically i done about 7 exercises maybe 8 and just done 2 sets every day I had recovered and felt like I could do so. This was very structured though and I only did maybe an extra rep or so per day so that the gains lasted for a long while. E.g say I standing pressed 180lbs for 2x5. The next day i did this exercise I was doing 2x6, then the following day I done it 2x7 etc etc.
On days I squatted I simply done the 2 sets of bench and a few sets of single deadlifts. for squats I done higher volume. Maybe 3-5 setsoverall. Sometimes more but as a general rule 3-5.
The way I explained the shoulder press was done on exercuises such as weighted dips, chins, standing press, t bar ropws. Deadlifts were done everyday i felt good in a single roputine. e.g 3 reps one day, then 5 the next day i recovered then 7 etc etc until I done 15x1. When i done 15x1 I then added 5kg and dropped back to 3 reps. The bench press I wave cycled starting very low. basically a 2 step forward 1 step back approach in 2.5kg jumps. E.g 110kg, 112.5kg 115kg then back to 112.5 then 115 then 117.5 etc. This worked very well though 2 sets a day of 5 reps was all I don, I found that as it got heavier it was easy to over train.
On pretty much everything apart form squats and deads I performed each exercise 2-4x a week. Maybe evn 5.
I got a lot stronger in a reasonably short space of time though did not get much bigger. I felt dense though. Does this make sense?
-
ya thanks dude. so you like a high volume of work once weekly, making sure to keep gradual progress with the weights, and every once in a while you throw in a day where you try lifting some weights that are way too heavy, and also everyonce in a while you throw in a day with lighter weights and chase the pump. does that sum it up, or is there something else missing?
-
I would say that is pretty accurate. I also focus on big compounds. Thats about it.
-
Nope.
No pic, I'm still fat.
Ok, I'll post mine first and you will look leaner by default. :o
-
Someone said they train for success. That is a great statement.
The objective should be to do more than you did the time (week) before. It's called progressive weight training. I alternate adding reps then adding weight. For example if your doing a low volume workout and your last set you do four reps, do five and the next time six. The workout after that increase the weight and drop back to four reps working your way back up to six or eight.
You can only add so much weight over time. For example, let's say you do seated one arm curls with 45 lbs and added only 5 lbs a month, in a year you'd be doing these curls with 105 lbs....not very likely right? So you increase sets and every so often change up your exercise routine so you don't go stale on any one exercise and you keep your body guessing and responding. That's progressive weight training.
In my opinion, it is wise to keep your workout schedule in mind while training so that you get through all the exercises you plan on doing. It is unlikely one can train to failure on each exercise they do in a given session. If they could, then they have been woefully under-training. Most of my routines call for the heavy lifting to happen at the beginning of the workout. I think this is the time to train to perceived failure.