Quads 3x/week?

[Joltan]

this chart is for natural people, so we take steroids to have increased protein synthesis 24/7

I agree that steroids obviously increase recovery time, so therefore you wouldn't be limited to the 6-8 sets before diminishing returns set in. But most likely it would still be more beneficial to break this up into more frequency (2x per week instead of 1x for example). And some people may have superior genetics that have much better recovery as well.

So, you most definitely can still get freakishly huge doing a 1x per week split if you fall into one of these categories. But not because it's the most optimum way to train.

 

[luki7788]

I agree that steroids obviously increase recovery time, so therefore you wouldn't be limited to the 6-8 sets before diminishing returns set in. But most likely it would still be more beneficial to break this up into more frequency (2x per week instead of 1x for example). And some people may have superior genetics that have much better recovery as well.

So, you most definitely can still get freakishly huge doing a 1x per week split if you fall into one of these categories. But not because it's the most optimum way to train.

I can train hamstrings even 3 times a week, but quads hard only once, maybe 1-2 light exercises on quads in the last part of the week - with higher frequency, after a few weeks I would not be able to walk with knee pain

 

[juggy38]

“You can’t train legs hard 3x a week”

I’ve seen a 242lb powerlifter back squat 545x9, plus accessories on Monday, Wednesday come in and hit 3x5 front squats at 405, and Friday pull deficit deadlift doubles in the 500s for a fucking hour.

He’s not “really training legs though”

 

[Joltan]

I personally don't believe you are training with very high intensity if you can train your legs 3x a week, I just don't see it. Even on a good amount of AAS (gram or under for alot of the low dosers here) and some GH everyday - I don't see it happening lol. If you have the train legs like a girl approach - sure, which will ultimately still develop your legs. It is entirely up to you how you want to split up your work over the week.

Typically if you are lifting 3x per week it means you are breaking up the total volume. So if you are currently training 1x per week with 24 sets - it would be the same as if you do 3x per week with 8 sets. Once you get over 8 sets protein synthesis starts to decline pretty rapidly - so you would get more out of your training if you were to break it up over 3 sessions.

Even if you were increasing volume (and frequency), you might be surprised how quickly your body adapts to it.

 

[juggy38]

@luki7788 makes a good point.

High frequency legs works….it’s the connective tissue that usually is the limit

 

[Joltan]

I can train hamstrings even 3 times a week, but quads hard only once, maybe 1-2 light exercises on quads in the last part of the week - with higher frequency, after a few weeks I would not be able to walk with knee pain

For sure. For most people it's the joints that is the limiting factor - especially older guys like us. And then maybe CNS fatigue.

My knees are pretty banged up from 15 years of wrestling.

 

[Joltan]

“You can’t train legs hard 3x a week”

I’ve seen a 242lb powerlifter back squat 545x9, plus accessories on Monday, Wednesday come in and hit 3x5 front squats at 405, and Friday pull deficit deadlift doubles in the 500s for a fucking hour.

He’s not “really training legs though”

That's not even that crazy... there are a lot of powerlifters that squat daily with high volume/weight. It's actually quite common.

 

[juggy38]

That's not even that crazy... there are a lot of powerlifters that squat daily with high volume/weight. It's actually quite common.

Yea I’m agreeing with you. You can definitely program legs 2-3x a week and train hard lol

 

[Flex500]

No, I mean volume. See the link I posted if interested in learning more.

Frequency has been shown NOT to matter when volume is equated. HOWEVER, research has shown diminishing returns after 6-8 sets in one session. So, if you are doing more than 8 total sets per body part in a week, then it is beneficial to increase the frequency because it becomes much more effective split out throughout the week. For example, if you do 24 sets per week - it is MUCH more effective to split this over 3x per week.

View attachment 164151

Thank you for posting this and the other notes. There is some really good discussion and leaning to be had.

I’ve gone through so much research (I find it interesting and we out in college/pro athletics; more in the sports med/orthopedic/injury realm but very interested in all this “stuff”) and it just seems hitting a muscle with close to failure twice a week with 6-10 sets each time is the best “mesh”, so to speak.

I’ve also realized if you literally go to the gym and really work hard you will progress on even the worst program.

I’ve been in the locker rooms of penn state, (a ton do them at U or a Michigan) and other schools and it’s interesting hearing from S&C coaches. A lot of them have this same discussion.

I remember in the 90s psu took out all the squat racks in it was much more like a Dorian Yates HIT style. They relied on leg press and pushing those sets with impeccable form to failure.

I go to other schools and their are guys squatting in a way they are muscle f$&@ing the weight and it just seems to pointless and dangerous.


I’m rambling, but appreciate your posts and enjoy the dialogue.

 

[M@NU]

@luki7788 makes a good point.

High frequency legs works….it’s the connective tissue that usually is the limit

true.
but i still think it can work if you
1.) find excersises that work for you without any knee pain
2.) use techniques that allow you to use lower weight without sacrificing intensity (e.g. use a slower tempo, use static holds @peak contraction etc.etc)
3.) use different strength curves. (e.g. cables, reverse bands,..)

i guess using those 3 points together with managing volume i could see myself training legs eod

 

[Dens228]

Thank you for posting this and the other notes. There is some really good discussion and leaning to be had.

I’ve gone through so much research (I find it interesting and we out in college/pro athletics; more in the sports med/orthopedic/injury realm but very interested in all this “stuff”) and it just seems hitting a muscle with close to failure twice a week with 6-10 sets each time is the best “mesh”, so to speak.

I’ve also realized if you literally go to the gym and really work hard you will progress on even the worst program.

I’ve been in the locker rooms of penn state, (a ton do them at U or a Michigan) and other schools and it’s interesting hearing from S&C coaches. A lot of them have this same discussion.

I remember in the 90s psu took out all the squat racks in it was much more like a Dorian Yates HIT style. They relied on leg press and pushing those sets with impeccable form to failure.

I go to other schools and their are guys squatting in a way they are muscle f$&@ing the weight and it just seems to pointless and dangerous.


I’m rambling, but appreciate your posts and enjoy the dialogue.

I played D1 football in the early 80's. Our team weight training consisted of the Nautilus/Mentzer type routines with a pre-exhaust and compound, usually supersetted. One superset to failure. The worst was the combo of extensions/leg press. I seem to remember it being on the same machine so you didn't even get up but I could be wrong on that. The workouts sucked but were over in about 20-30 minutes. A lot of us would do those mandatory workouts in the morning and then go to the school gym later in the afternoon for the more conventional workouts. Oh to be young again. LOL

 

[Flex500]

I played D1 football in the early 80's. Our team weight training consisted of the Nautilus/Mentzer type routines with a pre-exhaust and compound, usually supersetted. One superset to failure. The worst was the combo of extensions/leg press. I seem to remember it being on the same machine so you didn't even get up but I could be wrong on that. The workouts sucked but were over in about 20-30 minutes. A lot of us would do those mandatory workouts in the morning and then go to the school gym later in the afternoon for the more conventional workouts. Oh to be young again. LOL

Oh nice man! Yeah that is very similar to what I saw psu doing in the 90s! Very interesting!

 

[plane]

Typically if you are lifting 3x per week it means you are breaking up the total volume. So if you are currently training 1x per week with 24 sets - it would be the same as if you do 3x per week with 8 sets. Once you get over 8 sets protein synthesis starts to decline pretty rapidly - so you would get more out of your training if you were to break it up over 3 sessions.

Even if you were increasing volume (and frequency), you might be surprised how quickly your body adapts to it.

I referred to 'training like a girl' as the high frequency split approach, and training with high intensity as the once a week approach. I wrote that its entirely up to the individual how they want to split up 'the' workout. I should be more specific, i thought what I wrote was clear enough it didn't need further explanation. I don't believe there have been any studies on AAS/HGH/SLIN users - nor do we need more than personal experience in regards to figuring out what works for an individual. in my personal experience you can hammer your legs once a week and be done with it, or you can 'train like a girl' and split it up.

 

[plane]

Similar to Luki, I should of mentioned that - once a week would be the most I can consistently train quads intensely, if we are talking about calves - I feel higher frequency should be done.

 

[junker]

“You can’t train legs hard 3x a week”

I’ve seen a 242lb powerlifter back squat 545x9, plus accessories on Monday, Wednesday come in and hit 3x5 front squats at 405, and Friday pull deficit deadlift doubles in the 500s for a fucking hour.

He’s not “really training legs though”

ah, one guy can do that....so that means everyone can to!

 

[junker]

Buddy mechanical tension is the driver not volume.
You can do volume all day without mechanical tension, without those hard reps nothing will grow.
Muscle growth happens because of an adaption to stress (load).
You can read studies but interpreting them is a different story
Apparently you could care less about what causes growth as well
Also phil did not do 21 working sets for back.

so u agree 30 percent of 1 rep max is some seriously heavy mechanical tension? 25 rep sets? cuz every study lately shows 30 percent of 1 rep max is as effective as 90 percent....
oops. i forgot to add....when taken close to failure. 0-4 rir.....
the amount of sets taken close to failure...aka volume....of "hard" sets as mentioned above....

 

[Baphomet36]

so u agree 30 percent of 1 rep max is some seriously heavy mechanical tension? 25 rep sets? cuz every study lately shows 30 percent of 1 rep max is as effective as 90 percent....
oops. i forgot to add....when taken close to failure. 0-4 rir.....
the amount of sets taken close to failure...aka volume....of "hard" sets as mentioned above....

Seriously heavy mechanical tension…
You don’t increase mechanical tension.
Its either lower or remains constant.
So no I don’t agree.
I do agree that rep ranges don’t matter all that much as long as you get close to failure because those last 5-6 hard reps is when the stimulus happens
Stop throwing in volume.
You’re confusing volume load.
I explained already what mechanical tension is

 

[Baphomet36]

No, I mean volume. See the link I posted if interested in learning more.

Frequency has been shown NOT to matter when volume is equated. HOWEVER, research has shown diminishing returns after 6-8 sets in one session. So, if you are doing more than 8 total sets per body part in a week, then it is beneficial to increase the frequency because it becomes much more effective split out throughout the week. For example, if you do 24 sets per week - it is MUCH more effective to split this over 3x per week.

View attachment 164151

You know we’re not rats correct

 

[Elvia1023]

Obviously if you want to train quads 3 times per week the volume of each session is a massive factor. Training quads brutally hard with heavy weight 3 times per week is not going to end well in the long run regardless of your recovery capabilities. Now 1 big session and 2 mini sessions is a totally different thing. Training your legs 3 times weekly is also very different to training your quads 3 times weekly.

I personally would recommend 2 sessions per week with different rep ranges used for each (one lower and one higher). Generally I don't recommend a 3rd session as I think 2 hard sessions is plenty. Hey 2 hard sessions every 6 days if you want but fitting in a 3rd session just for the sake of it I don't think is the best route. Now there will always be exceptions and you could plan things all around your quads and include aids (hgh, slin, carbs, aminos, carnitine, tb500, short acting aas etc) then sure it could be done well but I wouldn't do it for long (more a blast cycle of training). If I were to do it one of those days would definitely just be leg extensions and pumping as much blood in there with moderate weight at most and for no more than 100 reps total.

 

[Elvia1023]

Obviously if your volume is way off (silly high or next to nothing) you need to look at it. However for everyone who is training with "regular" volume (probably 95% of people) you should always look towards execution and intensity first. Are you doing the best movements and the correct form for your quads. Are you targeting them effectively? Could you train harder as in are you going to complete failure? For most they are definitely not training hard enough and if they were they would never think training quads 3 times per weeks would be the answer.