Paul Carter on volume

[maldorf]

I understand what he's saying and he's got a good track recored but there have been TONS of great physiques and a lot of muscle built over the decades from high volume training far from failure.

He states that "there's not amount of volume that will create enough stimulus to grow muscle". IMO I think that's a pretty planet statement that doesn't apply to all. At 47, I feel I train very hard still but keep a few RIR and make up for it with increased volume. Unless your joints are totally bulletproof your training will need to switch to a higher volume approach as you age. After 30+ years of training the body (for most) cannot handle the high loading to failure training.

Training to failure doesn't require extra heavy weights and more stress on the joints. Someone could do a set of 10 leg presses to failure and then have a friend or two help force out another 5 reps to get to 15 reps. Perhaps only do 3 sets of that and be done. Not really "high volume".

 

[Reno911]

I’m 36. Since I was 18. You?

33 years.

 

[N.L....M.....]

33 years.

Okay. Great. And your point?

 

[KillerStack]

Training to failure doesn't require extra heavy weights and more stress on the joints. Someone could do a set of 10 leg presses to failure and then have a friend or two help force out another 5 reps to get to 15 reps. Perhaps only do 3 sets of that and be done. Not really "high volume".

I don't think I have ever seen a person go to failure on leg presses, maybe once or twice. Training since 15, 44 now. Failure means you actually fail. Most don't use any kind of safety stoppers so there's no way they go to failure. 5 reps past failure? Never seen it. How often do you see a person fail where they drop the weight to the bottom and have to remove and reload all the plates for the next set?
Reminds me of Chris Cormier doing hacks with Dorian and Chris is about to rack the weight a couple of times but Dorian forces him to go to failure. You could tell Chris wasn't used to this type of intensity.

Regarding high intensity, I'm looking at some female pros in the gym and they aren't anywhere close failure. But they are monstrous. So I think you can build considerable muscle just going through the motions.

That said, I'm in the high intensity/low volume camp as being the most optimal.

 

[Reno911]

Okay. Great. And your point?

My point is there are 101 ways to skin a cat. Most will work but..... as you age and put on more training "miles" your training will need to morph. You are doing things in the gym at 33 that you will not be able to do at 40 and 45. You're being very dogmatic that there is only 1 way to build muscle and that's just to that case.

 

[xpoc]

It seems we end up talking about the same thing when it comes to failure. Many assume training to failure means training with heavy weights for low reps. I have never seen any coach say that failure or even "heavy" had to mean low reps. But, people tend to assume that when they respond to posts on the subject. Heck, even Dante talks about failure in HIGH rep ranges (which obviously means much lighter weights than you can handle for a 1RM.). Heavy vs light is relative to the amount of reps you are targeting. 405lbs x 5 = heavy. 275x18= heavy. Assuming you hit failure or darn near close on the last rep.

With Carter my latest observation has nothing to do with either. It is more toward frequency and how he has drifted away from the higher frequency 2x per week per muscle group and more toward a bro split. He has cited studies to support this (most recently a Shoenfeld IG post) but in doing so he is going against beliefs of some who have influenced him (DC training, Dr. Scott Stevenson with Fortitude) and even his peer at TN, Christian Thibs. I don't think I have read him say where a bro split is superior, but most of his latest have been about how they are similarly effective when the volume is equal. And if that is the case, it blows the theory of high(er) frequency out of the water. If you could just hit chest on Monday....why hit it Monday and Thursday as long as the volume equates?

In my heart, a higher frequency (more than 1x per week) per body part makes sense so that is what I do. But, the cases he has cited do not support my belief. Heck, Dr. Scott's Fortitude training has you hitting bodyparts 4x per week albeit with a much lower per session volume. There are more than one way to skin a cat as we have seen top bodybuilders use a variety of vastly different splits. But the higher frequency, lower volume per session appeals to me personally.

 

[machomadness22]

I personally can’t stand Paul he always has the same “this is annoying question but let me break it down blah blah blah” he comes off as abrasive and while he might and surely know what he’s talking about it’s not someone I care to take advice from. He needs to humble himself a little he’s a damn forum writer he acts like he’s always doing shit for free when in reality he’s building his image so he can make money (which is totally fine and acceptable!)
There are way more humble and knowledgeable people I care to listen to. Personally

 

[N.L....M.....]

My point is there are 101 ways to skin a cat. Most will work but..... as you age and put on more training "miles" your training will need to morph. You are doing things in the gym at 33 that you will not be able to do at 40 and 45. You're being very dogmatic that there is only 1 way to build muscle and that's just to that case.

Do you have reading comprehension issues? I agreed with you. We disagreed based on terminology but when you broke it down I literally said I agree and what Paul Carter posted didn’t disagree either.
I’m not being dogmatic. I’m understanding how the human body works and hypertrophic adaptation occurs. Yes. There’s more than one way to skin a cat and how I train now at 36 is different than how I trained at 18 and even at 30 as far as movements and recovery. Again, when you explained what you meant I agreed with you. I never said low rep, failure training, low volume training only works. Paul Carter’s post didn’t say that either. Please reread it. You said far from failure, then explained that you meant around 3 reps and I agreed with you. You will still get effective reps leaving some reps in the tank. Are you arguing just to argue? Because you clearly didn’t read my post where I agreed with you and you clearly didn’t read what was posted originally. I gave the text book literal definition of effort in this context. The amount of effort refers to how close one is to failure.

 

[N.L....M.....]

I personally can’t stand Paul he always has the same “this is annoying question but let me break it down blah blah blah” he comes off as abrasive and while he might and surely know what he’s talking about it’s not someone I care to take advice from. He needs to humble himself a little he’s a damn forum writer he acts like he’s always doing shit for free when in reality he’s building his image so he can make money (which is totally fine and acceptable!)
There are way more humble and knowledgeable people I care to listen to. Personally

I could care less how abrasive someone is or even how much I dislike their personality if I’m not dealing with them on a personal level. The only thing that matters to me is their usefulness or the quality of their work, product, or knowledge. I’ve never personally met Paul so I can’t speak on him as a person.I respect people on the merits of their work. I’ve heard people say similar things about Layne Norton who is someone else in the industry that I’m a huge fan of.

 

[Elvia1023]

I don't think I have ever seen a person go to failure on leg presses, maybe once or twice. Training since 15, 44 now. Failure means you actually fail. Most don't use any kind of safety stoppers so there's no way they go to failure. 5 reps past failure? Never seen it. How often do you see a person fail where they drop the weight to the bottom and have to remove and reload all the plates for the next set?
Reminds me of Chris Cormier doing hacks with Dorian and Chris is about to rack the weight a couple of times but Dorian forces him to go to failure. You could tell Chris wasn't used to this type of intensity.

Regarding high intensity, I'm looking at some female pros in the gym and they aren't anywhere close failure. But they are monstrous. So I think you can build considerable muscle just going through the motions.

That said, I'm in the high intensity/low volume camp as being the most optimal.

Obviously if someone can sleep and eat all day (and they are consistent with everything) that changes things. However for most I think training to extreme intensity can often go against them both in the short and long term. Obviously volume comes massively into play as well and many dig a hole too big and it's hard to get out of especially with the frequency of training needed. Many people build fantastic physiques and they don't train what I consider hard. Yes for many if they trained harder they would look even better but definitely not all of them and building muscle can be done without taking working sets to the absolute extreme.

There is no one answer and everyone is different and there are so many variables that effect things. Don't get me wrong I am in your camp and I believe in brutal hard training. Generally speaking I believe in training as frequently as the body permits and on my P/P/L split that would be each body part twice in approx 8 days. Obviously the more frequent you train the less volume that should be used and when training regularly working sets need to be used sensibly. I push things because I like fairly high volume but I don't usually do more than about 8-12 working sets (not counting calves) per session and those are spread over 2-3 body parts.

 

[maldorf]

I don't think I have ever seen a person go to failure on leg presses, maybe once or twice. Training since 15, 44 now. Failure means you actually fail. Most don't use any kind of safety stoppers so there's no way they go to failure. 5 reps past failure? Never seen it. How often do you see a person fail where they drop the weight to the bottom and have to remove and reload all the plates for the next set?
Reminds me of Chris Cormier doing hacks with Dorian and Chris is about to rack the weight a couple of times but Dorian forces him to go to failure. You could tell Chris wasn't used to this type of intensity.

Regarding high intensity, I'm looking at some female pros in the gym and they aren't anywhere close failure. But they are monstrous. So I think you can build considerable muscle just going through the motions.

That said, I'm in the high intensity/low volume camp as being the most optimal.

When you have a training partner with you, you can do those things. Do leg presses until you can't push it up anymore and then your helper helps you push the sled up. We did it every week with belt squats. Have a guy behind you to pull you up and another 1 or 2 on the sides. We would do about 10 reps to failure and then fail coming up. Then the other guys helped me get another 10 reps past that. So 20 reps.

 

[KillerStack]

When you have a training partner with you, you can do those things. Do leg presses until you can't push it up anymore and then your helper helps you push the sled up. We did it every week with belt squats. Have a guy behind you to pull you up and another 1 or 2 on the sides. We would do about 10 reps to failure and then fail coming up. Then the other guys helped me get another 10 reps past that. So 20 reps.

See belt squats are a bit different. On leg presses with 1,500lbs or whatever ain't no training partner helping you do forced reps. Even with one on each side it's hard to get that type of load off a guy who fails. Nevermind for several forced reps, ain't happening. What they do, and you can see this on pros' videos, is that the spotters help a bit when the reps get hard, before they would have failed. Someone like Jordan Peters probably fails a lot but he's an anomaly. I always cringe when I've seen pros leg presses at Gold's Venice, tons of plates and no safety mechanism to bail if something snaps. It can happen at any point, long before failure.

 

[KillerStack]

Look at Dorian here. There is a small chance he might have hit another rep so it was only approximate failure, and Dorian was the epitome of hard training or so they say. Him doing several forced reps with a partner after this? No.

 

[N.L....M.....]

I don't think I have ever seen a person go to failure on leg presses, maybe once or twice. Training since 15, 44 now. Failure means you actually fail. Most don't use any kind of safety stoppers so there's no way they go to failure. 5 reps past failure? Never seen it. How often do you see a person fail where they drop the weight to the bottom and have to remove and reload all the plates for the next set?
Reminds me of Chris Cormier doing hacks with Dorian and Chris is about to rack the weight a couple of times but Dorian forces him to go to failure. You could tell Chris wasn't used to this type of intensity.

Regarding high intensity, I'm looking at some female pros in the gym and they aren't anywhere close failure. But they are monstrous. So I think you can build considerable muscle just going through the motions.

That said, I'm in the high intensity/low volume camp as being the most optimal.

Have you never heard of someone doing a widow maker set on a leg press? I went beyond failure hitting multiple failure points a couple days ago on leg press. I hit one set to failure then I hit multiple failure points on the back of set where I failed at 8 but kept going until I hit 20. It was terrible. Now I was on a seated leg press with adjustable stoppers but I literally pushed the weight until I could not budge it. Took a few breaths and did it multiple times. Lots of guys have done this with DC.

Regarding the female pros. Did you watch them over the years actually building the muscles? Do you know if they’re on a deload week or doing a pump day like Mt Dog has programmed in? Did you watch their entire workout set for set? You don’t what they’re doing? Did you watch them every workout week after week? Can you feel their muscle working?
Why does muscle grow? Adaptation. How do we force that adaptation? By making the muscle do something it hasn’t done before. Going through the motions does not break down tissue and doesn’t force adaptation.

There’s also failure, as in technical failure when form breaks and you stop and absolute failure as in you go until you can’t budge the weight.

 

[N.L....M.....]

He CLEARLY didn't understand your post! I did

Turns out I CLEARLY did. He CLEARLY didn’t understand mine.

 

[motiv]

I love high-intensity, low-volume workouts, but this is an unpopular opinion - high volume is needed, but not everyone. And no, I'm not talking about genetics and the like. I'm talking about the experience, goals and motivation of a person.
If a person, due to experience, motivation or any other reason, cannot progressive overload with high intensity, good form and mind-muscle connection - should he do high intensity work?
It is important to progress over time with a key mechanical position, good form and proper diet. Volume, intensity and frequency are just instruments.

 

[Elvia1023]

Look at Dorian here. There is a small chance he might have hit another rep so it was only approximate failure, and Dorian was the epitome of hard training or so they say. Him doing several forced reps with a partner after this? No.

Exactly. As you say Dorian was the epitome of hard training but he was also sensible and he used good form. I have seen a lot of his clips and thought he had at least 1 rep more in him and that isn't just dangerous movements like a leg press. To me that leg press set was perfect in many ways. It's stupid failing on a leg press with no safeties. Even just trying to get that last rep after you have essentially failed with perfect form is dangerous. Dorian definitely had 1 more rep (no help) in him on that set though but it's not needed imo (risks outweigh pros). Obviously it wasn't needed because look at him and he is one of the best bb's of all time and he already had enough injuries and going pass failure on movements like that is likely going to result in more injuries over the years. I have failed when training legs alone and had to shout for help but that was years ago. I have had a few leg presses in the past (technogym) and I could fail by myself and that was great and I would try to take the set beyond failure (partials) as much as I could on certain days. Loads of people train brutally hard today including Hunter Labrada and Liv Roth. That horrible feeling when you think you haven't locked the machine back in after your last rep you see it in her face (felt that many times myself )...

Liv Labrada IFBB PRO on Instagram: "6 plates each side for 12😈 - - Woke up today at 150.4 which is a new low, hit a gnarly hack PR, & @bryan_troi has blessed me with a burger - - @officialgasp & @officialbetterbodies code: LIVROTH - - - #IFBBf#ifbb

3,724 likes, 101 comments - livrothhApril 24, 2021 on : "6 plates each side for 12😈 - - Woke up today at 150.4 which is a new low, hit a gnarly hack PR, & @bryan_troi has blessed me with a bu..."

www.instagram.com

 

[MR. BMJ]

I think when it comes to Paul and his training style(s) at any given period, he is good at choosing what plan will meet his intended goal. He already has size behind him (not like pro BB size, but a good decent, strong and built frame). I think he utilizes what is best in the context of his goal at present. The guy is funny AF though.

 

[maldorf]

See belt squats are a bit different. On leg presses with 1,500lbs or whatever ain't no training partner helping you do forced reps. Even with one on each side it's hard to get that type of load off a guy who fails. Nevermind for several forced reps, ain't happening. What they do, and you can see this on pros' videos, is that the spotters help a bit when the reps get hard, before they would have failed. Someone like Jordan Peters probably fails a lot but he's an anomaly. I always cringe when I've seen pros leg presses at Gold's Venice, tons of plates and no safety mechanism to bail if something snaps. It can happen at any point, long before failure.

Well, I had over 1000 lbs on the press and had 2 guys help me get out an extra 5 reps after I hit failure.

On belt squats we had on between 600 and 800 lbs and were getting 10 forced reps with 3 helpers. My lifting partner's father worked somewhere with metal and made us 200 lb plates so we could fit more on the belt!

It's not practical for most, but as an extreme it illustrated to me how important intensity is in growth. I never grew like that again once I stopped doing it. John Parrillo stopped coming to the gym when he and the main guy he was training had a falling out. I was just lucky to train with them.

Training legs with them was like going to war. I put on about 40 lbs on my squat in 2 months or less. Can't remember.

 

[maldorf]

This is what we used.