- Joined
- Jun 20, 2017
- Messages
- 1,539
There’s 2 studies that came out recently supporting the more work sets you do for a muscle, the more it grows, up to at least 45 sets per week—to failure. I say hogwash!!! What say you?
This. id rather train intense than do 45 sets a week of playing around in the gymNo one can do that many sets to true failure. I don't care about the stories of Michalik and Defendis. It's not possible, period.
I agree because I tried it in the past and my CNS and joints just couldn’t take it!No one can do that many sets to true failure. I don't care about the stories of Michalik and Defendis. It's not possible, period.
The study said one bodybuilder using steroids did 35 sets of squats to failure. I would literally pass out way before then, especially while using tren.This. id rather train intense than do 45 sets a week of playing around in the gym
A scientific study using enhanced subjects?The study said one bodybuilder using steroids did 35 sets of squats to failure. I would literally pass out way before then, especially while using tren.
There’s 2 studies that came out recently supporting the more work sets you do for a muscle, the more it grows, up to at least 45 sets per week—to failure. I say hogwash!!! What say you?
Idk that sort of training worked for me as a newb teenager but these days if I do more than 1-2 failure sets I'll be weaker the next workoutThere’s 2 studies that came out recently supporting the more work sets you do for a muscle, the more it grows, up to at least 45 sets per week—to failure. I say hogwash!!! What say you?
Yes, that’s the study I am referring to.I'm pretty sure he is talking about Brad Schoenfeld's study that Juggy mentioned above. It was talked about on here a few weeks back, I think on the heavy vs. light training thread? His protocol seemed pretty unrealistic to me the way it was designed.