Quads 3x/week?

[Baphomet36]

It quite literally does. Your not responding to anyone's quite rationale posts with anything other than stating your opinion over and over. While I don't agree with everything the NSCA is quite clear volume is a tangible factor that can be contorted to achieve progressive overload.

It is quite literally, not hypothetically, literally what is taught to every strength coach in the united states.

Is it possible we are just talking about two different things?

Where you are getting that volume is not a variable that can be used for progressive overload because I've got a stack of textbooks that state otherwise and a whole bunch of real world practice that agrees.

It is not my opinion that progressive overload and progressive volume load are 2 different things.
Volume load can be used as a way to track progression sure.
But adding sets does not increase the load on the muscle.

Progressive overload allows us to keep the stimulus on the muscle (mechanical tension) the same from workout to workout.

I’m not sure what the confusion is.

Do I need to reexplain what mechanical tension is?

 

[marssel]

You can science the fuck out of training but at the end of the day the guy that goes in and has a blast going nuts out to failure with high volume will always get better. I’m assuming nutrition, sleep , water etc. are on point. I believe this to always be more successful than living and dying by a journal and a calculator. Yes you want to have a training format but how many times have you had an amazing lift just going in and hammering your muscles going from straight to pyramid, with giants and drops based on what’s open and digging down to dig up and into those sets where your muscles are screaming……those are the best days in the gym and imo lead to growth as well as happiness bc the gym is where I go to get my head and heart straight, yes I use volume, FST-7, GVT, and progressive overload but I only marry myself to training as hard as I can everytime I walk on the floor. Once training becomes more work than fun imo you’ll never surpass where you are until you start enjoying the grind again.

 

[Joltan]

Jay Cutler says in this video that 2-3x per week is optimal with total weekly sets around 20. He does a 2 on 1 off schedule now. This aligns with the current science... 6-8 sets per session, 2-3x per week for a total of 18-20 sets per week. He mentioned Ronnie and Phil also did 2x per week too.

Mentioning this bc I saw a couple people in this thread pushing 1x per day because they though that Jay, Ronnie, Phil were using this... not true.

He did say 1x per week is best for beginners and general people that just want to get in shape. But for advanced bodybuilders more volume/frequency is best.

 

[alfresco]

Jay Cutler says in this video that 2-3x per week is optimal with total weekly sets around 20. He does a 2 on 1 off schedule now. This aligns with the current science... 6-8 sets per session, 2-3x per week for a total of 18-20 sets per week. He mentioned Ronnie and Phil also did 2x per week too.

Mentioning this bc I saw a couple people in this thread pushing 1x per day because they though that Jay, Ronnie, Phil were using this... not true.

He did say 1x per week is best for beginners and general people that just want to get in shape. But for advanced bodybuilders more volume/frequency is best.

In all fairness, in an interview with him he said he quit training legs for a year or two so his upper body could catch up.

We should all have this problem

 

[Joltan]

Chris Bumstead is also on the same page, and outlines in this video how 2-3x per week is optimal for growth. He explains why 1x per week in not good.

Specifically, he does a push/pull/legs -repeat routine.

 

[Golden]

Has anybody ever noticed when switching from x 1 per week to x 2 per week any real noticeable difference in growth?

 

[FK86]

@Joltan

Looking at what professional bodybuilders do is the last thing normal people should consider. None of these guys have any idea what actually works because everything works for them. I didn't watch either video, but if Cutler and Bumstead are pushing frequency, it's because it's trendy and they want the views and likes. I'm 36 and followed Jay's career when I started lifting 20 years ago. I can say with absolute certainty he trained body parts every 5-7 days with high volume. All the old magazines and videos confirm this. Bumstead built his physique doing the same most likely. He's all of a sudden about frequency because he moved to Florida and is in Jansen's inner circle with business and training. Jansen pushes frequency because Jansen ripped off Jordan Peters. To clarify, I'm not pushing low frequency. I myself train body parts twice a week. I'm just pointing out the motive of these guys and how they train is irrelevant because they're mutants.

 

[Joltan]

Has anybody ever noticed when switching from x 1 per week to x 2 per week any real noticeable difference in growth?

On 1x per week I don't grow. I have to be on 2x per week minimum to make any improvements at this point. Also, when cutting if I do anything less than 2x, I start to lose muscle.

I am on TRT and don't take it past that point. If you are taking a lot of drugs, I'm sure 1x per week would be enough to make some small gains for most beginner to intermediates.

 

[Joltan]

@Joltan

Looking at what professional bodybuilders do is the last thing normal people should consider. None of these guys have any idea what actually works because everything works for them. I didn't watch either video, but if Cutler and Bumstead are pushing frequency, it's because it's trendy and they want the views and likes. I'm 36 and followed Jay's career when I started lifting 20 years ago. I can say with absolute certainty he trained body parts every 5-7 days with high volume. All the old magazines and videos confirm this. Bumstead built his physique doing the same most likely. He's all of a sudden about frequency because he moved to Florida and is in Jansen's inner circle with business and training. Jansen pushes frequency because Jansen ripped off Jordan Peters. To clarify, I'm not pushing low frequency. I myself train body parts twice a week. I'm just pointing out the motive of these guys and how they train is irrelevant because they're mutants.

What the pros do has no influence on anything I am talking about... I just posted those because a couple people posted in this thread saying these pros were on 1x per week. Clearly they don't know what they're talking about.

 

[Flex500]

It is not my opinion that progressive overload and progressive volume load are 2 different things.
Volume load can be used as a way to track progression sure.
But adding sets does not increase the load on the muscle.

Progressive overload allows us to keep the stimulus on the muscle (mechanical tension) the same from workout to workout.

I’m not sure what the confusion is.

Do I need to reexplain what mechanical tension is?

It's a circular argument about semantics at this point. My view (and that of the NSCA and every other strength training organization and educational forums/schools/resources) is that using volume is a way to progressively overload. It's just math. Progressive overload isn't a "feeling".

You can absolutely progressively overload without training to failure as long as you are challenging the body to essentially "do more" over time. Weight, reps, sets.

Maybe where we are going off the rails is there must be enough mechanical tension. I'm not saying lifting an empty barbell 5 times and doing it two extra sets when all sets take zero effort is progressive overload.

That is why in my 10x3 example where you never come close to failure, you are lifting 80% plus your 1RM for 30 reps. No failure but extreme mechanical tension.


In a practical sense we are arguing about nothing. I'm saying to effectively and progressively grow and get stronger you must continue to push the body in a new place with weight, sets, or reps with "challenging" amounts of effort.

 

[1fst400]

Has anybody ever noticed when switching from x 1 per week to x 2 per week any real noticeable difference in growth?

Yes, that's why I started this thread. Noticeable difference. Currently doing 2x/week and thinking about a couple of training blocks with 3x/week to see if it is worth it. I don't know, but I will see. It's helpful to get others' experience with this and I'll probably report back if it was a waste of time/energy or if it really helped.

 

[M@NU]

it is absolutely no waste of time.
but you have to really be careful to keep volume low and only use excersises that "fit to your body" (no joint / connective tissue irritation)
i am a higher frequency guy (from 2x per week to 6 times each muscle per weak.. ive tried it all).
for me, since i also train to failure (or forced reps for very few sets) i have to really keep an eye on volume and recovery.
a day might look like this (i dont have a fixed muscle group split, i rotate)
Legs (hams focus) + back, no warmups listed (usually 2 warmups for the first exc., 1 warmup for following exc. of same muscle)
seated ham curl : 1set 6-10 reps, 1set 10-15 (both to failure, no forced reps)
Leg extension : 1 set of 15-20 to failure + 2-3 forced reps with 2s hold at top
leg press or smith squat : 1 set of 12-20 reps, no forced reps
lying leg curl : 1 set of 6-10 reps+2-3 negatives
if i did leg press: heavy romanian deadlift as the last leg excersise and first back excersise.. 1 set of 5-8, 1 set of 8-12
if i did smith squats: 2 sets of hyperextensions with additional weight 12-15 reps
1 arm cable row for lat from above : 1 set 8-12, 1 set 12-20
overhand cable row: 1 set 8-12, 1 set 12-20
pullovers hunter labrada style (seated at the cable) 1 set of 10-12 + 2-3 forced reps, 1 set of 15-20

thats it
takes me around 75minutes and i am completely done afterwards
the thing is that your training intensity changes alot how often you can train without wrecking esp. your central nervous system.
3 full quad days would be impossible for me to recover.
2 ham days + 1 quad day with a touch of quads at the 2 ham days is possible.

 

[alfresco]

Has anybody ever noticed when switching from x 1 per week to x 2 per week any real noticeable difference in growth?

Yes.

But I have been working out longer than most people here have been alive


3x is optimal for me (and as you become older, counter intuitive I know) but I take a 1 week break (‘everybody’ should) every 60 days.

And then come back with a upper body / rest / lower body / rest, a rotation for another 60 days then back again to 3x ad nauseam . . .

 

[Elvia1023]

@Joltan

Looking at what professional bodybuilders do is the last thing normal people should consider. None of these guys have any idea what actually works because everything works for them. I didn't watch either video, but if Cutler and Bumstead are pushing frequency, it's because it's trendy and they want the views and likes. I'm 36 and followed Jay's career when I started lifting 20 years ago. I can say with absolute certainty he trained body parts every 5-7 days with high volume. All the old magazines and videos confirm this. Bumstead built his physique doing the same most likely. He's all of a sudden about frequency because he moved to Florida and is in Jansen's inner circle with business and training. Jansen pushes frequency because Jansen ripped off Jordan Peters. To clarify, I'm not pushing low frequency. I myself train body parts twice a week. I'm just pointing out the motive of these guys and how they train is irrelevant because they're mutants.

x2

They are not training big body parts 3 times weekly. I have seen cutler say he trained everything once weekly with very high volume many times over the years. He may have started training much more frequently but he shouldn't forget what he has said for many years. You only have to follow some of these guys on social media because they post (and even film) their routines all the time. Cutler's training in the last 10 years is a very different thing to what he done in the past. He doesn't lift heavy now and he barely breaks a sweat in regards to intensity. Reminds me of him recently saying hgh is overrated etc but that didn't stop him taking as much of it as possible when competing.

Some times people forget their pasts and what it took to get them to where they did. I should add I am very much a frequency trainer and completely agree with what him and Chris Bumstead stated I just know Jay trained much differently to what he is stating recently. For reference I have trained PPL for a long time now and I usually train everything (max intensity and fairly high volume) twice weekly (7-9 days).

Going back to my previous posts in this thread you can make anything work and the more you train x bodypart the less volume you should be using on any given day. I have trained body parts 1-6 times weekly for example. It can also be very different training your legs 3 times weekly to training quads 3 times weekly. When I was training legs 3 times weekly I would often have a standard day then a more ham focused day and then a more quad focused day. So quads were trained 3 times per week many times but on that 3rd day it was a few standard sets of an isolation movement to get blood in there. I also know many who have squatted everyday for short bursts with success as well. However following a split of training your quads 3 times weekly with hard intensity and big movements (squats, hack squats and leg press) in each of those days is going to go against 99% of people in the long run.

Now the definition of a working set is different for many people so that is a massive factor. 95% of people I see in the gym do not train to failure so they could very easily train quads 3 (or 4) times weekly. Most of the best movements for quads taken to extreme intensity are going to take it out of you. They will fry the nervous system if done frequently like that. Yes your body adapts but still I wouldn't recommend it.

I think as you get older higher frequency is optimal but older guys shouldn't really be loading the leg press or squat bar and putting everything they have into getting as many reps as possible. If they were to do that then once weekly at most imo. The rest should be working the muscle and getting as much blood in there and training with smart weight and intensity. Again there are exceptions to every rule though.

 

[marssel]

Jay Cutler says in this video that 2-3x per week is optimal with total weekly sets around 20. He does a 2 on 1 off schedule now. This aligns with the current science... 6-8 sets per session, 2-3x per week for a total of 18-20 sets per week. He mentioned Ronnie and Phil also did 2x per week too.

Mentioning this bc I saw a couple people in this thread pushing 1x per day because they though that Jay, Ronnie, Phil were using this... not true.

He did say 1x per week is best for beginners and general people that just want to get in shape. But for advanced bodybuilders more volume/frequency is best.

Jay lies but even if it were true you’re not Jay not even on his planet

 

[1fst400]

Jay lies but even if it were true you’re not Jay not even on his planet

LOL...Everyone lies. Especially people on this board.

 

[lookslikesausage]

Sure, if you can recover. I once did some powerlifting program, believe it was called junior something. Had me squat 4 times a week. Was actually pretty cool but my ankles and shin didn't appreciate it so gave up.

Smolov Junior?

 

[astrosfan123]

it is absolutely no waste of time.
but you have to really be careful to keep volume low and only use excersises that "fit to your body" (no joint / connective tissue irritation)
i am a higher frequency guy (from 2x per week to 6 times each muscle per weak.. ive tried it all).
for me, since i also train to failure (or forced reps for very few sets) i have to really keep an eye on volume and recovery.
a day might look like this (i dont have a fixed muscle group split, i rotate)
Legs (hams focus) + back, no warmups listed (usually 2 warmups for the first exc., 1 warmup for following exc. of same muscle)
seated ham curl : 1set 6-10 reps, 1set 10-15 (both to failure, no forced reps)
Leg extension : 1 set of 15-20 to failure + 2-3 forced reps with 2s hold at top
leg press or smith squat : 1 set of 12-20 reps, no forced reps
lying leg curl : 1 set of 6-10 reps+2-3 negatives
if i did leg press: heavy romanian deadlift as the last leg excersise and first back excersise.. 1 set of 5-8, 1 set of 8-12
if i did smith squats: 2 sets of hyperextensions with additional weight 12-15 reps
1 arm cable row for lat from above : 1 set 8-12, 1 set 12-20
overhand cable row: 1 set 8-12, 1 set 12-20
pullovers hunter labrada style (seated at the cable) 1 set of 10-12 + 2-3 forced reps, 1 set of 15-20

thats it
takes me around 75minutes and i am completely done afterwards
the thing is that your training intensity changes alot how often you can train without wrecking esp. your central nervous system.
3 full quad days would be impossible for me to recover.
2 ham days + 1 quad day with a touch of quads at the 2 ham days is possible.

that looks like a solid workout there, is this something you use with a push pull legs split and then have a leg/pull combo day or what is the split there?

 

[juggy38]

We are not talking about DC or John meadows creeping desth trashing the legs 3x a week.

Andy baker…a powerlifter and coach has a great heavy light medium leg structure. The meat and potatoes….

4-5x5 squat+Accessories monday
2-3x5 @70% monday weight.
Friday ramp to 1x5 PR set+accessories.

Obviously the Wednesday is easy and Friday is a medium stimulus. Monday is the hard day

 

[D2]