The Reason Why Muscles Don't Grow With Low Volume.

[no one]

ahahahahaha

4+ pages of 'isuck' getting his stupid ass handed to him.

keep up the good work, moron.

[challenge]

I think what can add credibility to this thread is if both Royal Lion and Suckmymuscle post a current picture of themselves.

Whoever looks the best will have the credibility.

ROLF!!! I'm just kidding... i've seen suckmymuscles picture and he looks like he never trained in his life. I don't think anybody can  look worse.

+2 points to Royal lion!

[PJim]

I don't claim to be a beast but I am natural and train very low volume, 6 overall working sets on arms across 3 weeks. I use pre-exhaust that is VERY intense and produces A LOT of results. In my eyes, muscles DO indeed grow on low volume

[FREAKgeek]

   
  Conclusion: muscular hypertrophy is only one of the mechanisms skeletal muscle have to become stronger and it is secondary in activation to several others. To achieve muscular hypertrophy, huge weights with low work load is ineffective because there is enormous room for your muscles to grow in strengh before growing in size. You'll need to use gigantic weights to achieve only a moderate degree of hypertrophy with a few contractions.

  Conclusion II: To maximize hypertrophy, increase strengh enormously first via powerlifting or one-set-to-failure protocols, then stagnate the weight you're using and work on increasind the amount of work you can perform with that weight. Huge gains in the cross sectional area of muscle will follow. Once volume has increased to the point where you have observed that your gains have stagnated, work on increasing your strengh agains via powerlifting type training. Repeat ad infinitum.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

I agree, but I think another important factor you left out is variety of exercises  (different angles of stress).  Most powerlifters and HIT trainees do a stubborn selection of routines, whereas a big bodybuilder does a wider selection of exercises.

Most HIT people think different angles of stress is unnecessary and argue that the muscle "can't be fooled". They believe that a compound movement is sufficient in stimulating maximum development, which I believe is incorrect. The human body is capable of so many movements that simplifying it to one or a few movement will not get the goal of maximum muscular potential done. Don't get me wrong, you can get a lot of bang for your buck with abbreviated routines, but not complete muscular development.

For example, if all you did was squat, you will get strong and very good at the movement.  You will put on muscle. But, if you later on incorporated leg extensions, leg curls, and other leg press variations, you'd find you will be lacking in strength in the areas. People who regularly only do the latter will most likely be better than you, despite you probably being better at the squat than theses same people.

[pumpster]

I think what can add credibility to this thread is if both Royal Lion and Suckmymuscle post a current picture of themselves.

Sucky claims a 620 lb. bench.   

 

[challenge]

Sucky claims a 620 lb. bench.   

 

even more outrageous then arvilla's 600 pound squats!!!

[Royal Lion]

I think what can add credibility to this thread is if both Royal Lion and Suckmymuscle post a current picture of themselves.

Whoever looks the best will have the credibility.

ROLF!!! I'm just kidding... i've seen suckmymuscles picture and he looks like he never trained in his life. I don't think anybody can  look worse.

+2 points to Royal lion!

Lol....thanks!  I am currently training for a triathlon and only hitting weights 2 times per week.  I am 6'3/210 and probably just below 10% bodyfat -- definitely small by "bodybuilding" standards, but I am in shape and have decent strength for a natty.   

[suckmymuscle]

Just wait until ISUCKMYMUSCLE pipes in and claims your powerlifting was high volume just as he claims Dorian was  a volume trainer despite it being common knowledge that he wasn't. 

  Define volume training, idiot? Dorian did 3 sets of 6-8 reps whilst resting no more than 1 minute per set for 9 years. That's far more volume than what powerlifters do. He also used high intensity techniques like  forced reps, rest-pause and negstives. Powerlifters don't do that, because their goal is not muscular hypertrophy. You = fail.

  And I'm still waiting for you to explain why your sprinters example is relevant to prove that low volume with heavy weights works better for mass given that:

  1. Sprinters do a lot more volume in their training than powerlifters.

  2. Bodybuilders who train with multiple sets doing more than 6 reps per set have a lot more muscle than either sprinters o powerlifters.

  Happy thinking! Oh wait, you haven't learned how to do that so far.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[suckmymuscle]

okay, why not do 90-120 sets? Surely you would double your results....

  Third moron in this thread who can't fucking read. It is amazing. Let's try this again, moron. I wrote especifically that too much volume is detrimental to mass because it depletes the body's biochemical resources. What I mean by high volume is not marathon training, but the traditional bodybuilding system of 3 to 4 sets per exercise in the 6 to 8 rep range, contrasted to powerlifters, who usually do doubles and triples with ultra heavy weights. I never claimed that a increase of volume ad infinitum would result in exponential gains. Dumbass.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Eisenherz]

sucky you once again revealed your insecurity and made yourself look stupid.
Time to move on.
Peace.

[suckmymuscle]

ahahahahaha

4+ pages of 'isuck' getting his stupid ass handed to him.

keep up the good work, moron.

  No, wrong. 5 pages and you idiots have done nothing to disprove a single word I wrote. You have failed to find even a single logical inconsistency in my theory, or to contradict it in any way. I don't have any hopes of your dumbass realizing this, though, because the dumb support each other and think their dumbness makes sense.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[suckmymuscle]

sucky you once again revealed your insecurity and made yourself look stupid.
Time to move on.
Peace.

  You got your ass fucked by me in this thread and the only reason you keep responding is out of spite because you can't tolerate the fact that someone is smarter than you. And by the way, that article you posted did not conclude that one-set-to-failure results in muscle mass gains. Read the article again, dude. The conclusion is that one-set-to-failure led to an increase in strengh, but there isn't a single word about it giving the test subjects increased muscle mass.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[io856]

hey suckmymuscle

Could you give a brief explanation of how this theory would apply in practice?

So like 5 weeks of low volume/progressive load and then what sort of weights would  be used for the next phase and at what length? What sort of volume would be used to achieve hypertrophy? Frequency?

[suckmymuscle]

I don't claim to be a beast but I am natural and train very low volume, 6 overall working sets on arms across 3 weeks. I use pre-exhaust that is VERY intense and produces A LOT of results. In my eyes, muscles DO indeed grow on low volume

  You don't even know that what you're doing is not low volume. 6 sets for arms in 3 weeks is a lot. Mike Mentzer doesen't even recommend training arms in his consolidation routine presented in Heavy Duty II. Also, pre-exhaustion technique is a high intensity technique that has nothing to do with strengh training: it is hypertrophy training. Powrrliters and other strengh athletes don't pre-exhaust muscles and then go to do a set o up to 8 reps following that; they do doubles and triples and rest for over 6 minutes per set. You guys are so stupid that you claim to train in a way that you don't do.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Eisenherz]

there isn't a single word about it giving the test subjects increased muscle mass.
SUCKMYMUSCLE

You gotta be shitting me brah, http://exercise.about.com/cs/weightlifting/a/onesettraining.htm
 "The controversy

The conflicting opinions about how many sets is best stems from the Overload Principle. Research suggests that, in order to gain strength and size, you have to overload your muscle--push it beyond it's present capacity. From this theory, we know that intensity is to key to strength gains. So, can you get the kind of intensity you need from one set? Some folks think it doesn't matter if you fatigue your muscles in one set or several sets -- as long as your muscles experience a sufficient level of exhaustion."

The Physician and Sports Medicine agrees. In a comparison of several different studies, only one found that multiple sets elicited greater strength gains than single set training, while the other studies found no significant difference. Conclusion? You can get a great workout using single-set training methods, as long as you focus on quality, not quantity."

  You got your ass fucked by me in this thread and the only reason you keep responding is out of spite because you can't tolerate the fact that someone is smarter than you.

Catcha on the rebound brah.

[Royal Lion]

  You don't even know that what you're doing is not low volume. 6 sets for arms in 3 weeks is a lot. Mike Mentzer doesen't even recommend training arms in his consolidation routine presented in Heavy Duty II. Also, pre-exhaustion technique is a high intensity technique that has nothing to do with strengh training: it is hypertrophy training. Powrrliters and other strengh athletes don't pre-exhaust muscles and then go to do a set o up to 8 reps following that; they do doubles and triples and rest for over 6 minutes per set. You guys are so stupid that you claim to train in a way that you don't do.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

You think 6 sets of arms over 21 days is a lot of volume.  Holy shit - I guess you haven't reached the peak of your stupidity yet.  Keep posting!

[suckmymuscle]

hey suckmymuscle

Could you give a brief explanation of how this theory would apply in practice?

So like 5 weeks of low volume/progressive load and then what sort of weights would  be used for the next phase and at what length? What sort of volume would be used to achieve hypertrophy? Frequency?

  Do one-set-to-failure with very heavy weights after warming up, and work on increasing your bench, squat deads military presses by doing doubles and triples and resting a lot between sets so you have your full strengh. Also do some isolation training for your triceps and delts with very heavy weights for low reps because you need more strengh in these muscles for the bench and military presses.

  After you've increased your 1 rep max by 50% in the big exercises, stop increasing the weight and try on increasing the number of reps you can perorm with that weight and decrease your rest intervals between sets. Do the traditional bodybuilding way of 3-5 sets. After you can do 4 sets of 6-10 with the weight, go back to strengh training and focus on the strengh.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[suckmymuscle]

You gotta be shitting me brah, http://exercise.about.com/cs/weightlifting/a/onesettraining.htm
 "The controversy

The conflicting opinions about how many sets is best stems from the Overload Principle. Research suggests that, in order to gain strength and size, you have to overload your muscle--push it beyond it's present capacity. From this theory, we know that intensity is to key to strength gains. So, can you get the kind of intensity you need from one set? Some folks think it doesn't matter if you fatigue your muscles in one set or several sets -- as long as your muscles experience a sufficient level of exhaustion."

The Physician and Sports Medicine agrees. In a comparison of several different studies, only one found that multiple sets elicited greater strength gains than single set training, while the other studies found no significant difference. Conclusion? You can get a great workout using single-set training methods, as long as you focus on quality, not quantity."

Catcha on the rebound brah.

  Fail. The article doesen't say a single word about the subjects experiencing a gain of muscle mass after the period. What the study says is that their strengh increased. Which is what I claim this kind of training does. You though you had struck gold with this, only to have it burst on your ass.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Eisenherz]

hey suckmymuscle

Could you give a brief explanation of how this theory would apply in practice?

So like 5 weeks of low volume/progressive load and then what sort of weights would  be used for the next phase and at what length? What sort of volume would be used to achieve hypertrophy? Frequency?

Bottom line is that SIZE follows STRENGTH, so the main goal is to increase your strength, which overloads the muscle resulting in increase in size.

BOTTOM FUCKING LINE.

[Eisenherz]

  Fail. The article doesen't say a single word about the subjects experiencing a gain of muscle mass after the period. What the study says is that their strengh increased. Which is what I claim this kind of training does. You though you had struk gold with this, onl to have it burst on your ass.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

If you cant make the connection that increased strength results in increase of size then god help you.

[Royal Lion]

It's apparent after last night's debate that ISUCKMUSCLE has a tough time comprehending what the rest of us view as simple concepts.  He is truly in his own little insecure world wherein he has to insult those of us who make logical points to make himself better.  Sad really.

[tbombz]

Bottom line is that SIZE follows STRENGTH

no thats wrong

[io856]

Bottom line is that SIZE follows STRENGTH, so the main goal is to increase your strength, which overloads the muscle resulting in increase in size.

BOTTOM FUCKING LINE.

o rly?

[suckmymuscle]

You think 6 sets of arms over 21 days is a lot of volume.  Holy shit - I guess you haven't reached the peak of your stupidity yet.  Keep posting!

  Still waiting for your explanation for why you used the example of the sprinter to prove that low volume works with heavy weights work for mass since bodybuilders have more mass than sprinters and sprinters do a lot of volume with their sprinters.. Oh brother, that was dumb even for you.

  Anyways, 6 sets for arms is 21 days is not strengh training. I have Mike Mentzer's Heavy Duty, and he doesen't even advocate training arms. His routine is nothing but deadlifts, military presses and dps. Do you really think powerlifters do barbell curls and triceps kickbacks, genius? Again, six sets for arms with reps in the 6+ range is hypertrophy training and not strengh training. You: stupido.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Eisenherz]

no thats wrong

Ok cool, I'll continue to increase my poundages from week to week and stay the same size  .
And you continue to do what works for you.

P.S. I've lost all hope in humanity.