You missed the point… how many guys get into the NFL and never play or get signed or paid- a lot.
I take it by not getting paid you mean not getting that "pay day".You missed the point… how many guys get into the NFL and never play or get signed or paid- a lot.
They’re still a pro athlete if they get cut or lose that contract as a bench warmer.
Thank you for explaining what I hope everyone already knew.
Brian Scalabrine (commonly referred to as the worst NBA player during his playing career) was a bench warmer player who made the statement “I’m closer to Lebron than you are to me”. A sports show proceeded to invite guests with high school basketball experience to play games up to 11 points vs him. He obliterated everyone, then proceeded to play a 3v1 game against the show hosts and won 11-1. The “worst pro-bodybuilder” is still light years ahead of the average gear user
I'll take it one step further and use myself as an example - I'd be a horrible competitive bodybuilder. Yeah I could likely go pro just based off how much muscle I have and how conditioned I get but I'd never place top 10 at a pro show.
Love myo reps and intensity techniques in general for small parts and isolation exercises. Only thing I never understood is why most people who advocate them don't hit failure on the mini sets. The technique is very similar to rest pause where every mini set is to failure. I get that people want to manage fatigue but for something like a cable tricep press down...it's not like a squat. If you take the initial set to failure and each mini set...it's not like you're going to be so fatigued you can't keep going
I haven’t personally tried myo reps but they definitely look like something that would be right in my wheelhouse. The DC-style rest pause is one of my absolute set types.
I'm just catching up on this thread now, but I agree whole heartedly with this. I can play an intense game of pick up basketball and my legs will be a million times more sore than if I did squats as a result of my body being so used to squats. I sure as hell am not building more leg muscle by playing basketball than by doing squats. Brad Schoenfeld has done quite a few studies on soreness and concluded that it doesn't mean you're gaining more muscle.
I know so many people who've trained for years and don't look that great. The one observation I have about many of them is that they don't eat enough protein. They'll say for example, that their breakfast is just oatmeal with some blueberries and nuts. THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE A PROTEIN SOURCE WITH BREAKFAST. Protein is literally the lowest hanging fruit when it comes to muscle growth. It's so incredible easy to get a gram per pound. All someone has to do is add some whey to reach that amount if they don't get it from solid food. Even worse is they think whey is an unhealthy food (false As fuck). It just demonstrates that so many people have a complete lack of understanding of how to structure their diets for muscle growth. It just blows my mind since I have been eating a MINIMUM of 200g protein daily for the last 20 years of my life.
Hey QB,
(It's just that the difference in reps in reserve / failure points vis-a-vis muscle group size / exercise don't show up in Muscle Rounds per se for the sake of having a standardized way of "dosing" the set, so you can better attend to progressive overload.)
Damn, great info... makes sense. Appreciate you taking the time to reply and all the info you provide anytime I come across you on various YouTube channels.Hey QB,
I can tell you how I addressed this throughout Fortitude Training (that overall inroads to recovery / CNS, stress, etc. is less for smaller muscle groups and isolation exercises vs. compound movements), although there is one (only one) failure point on the Muscle Round (cluster set).
-On Loading Sets (a "set type" in FT), Isolation exercises can be taken to failure , e.g. pec fly, whereas failure is reserved for only the last set of the compound exercises (e.g., HS press).
-For Muscle Rounds, the rational is to have the single failure point as a marker for gauging progress (at what point throughout the MR the failure happens, as well as how many reps for that set) for setting your self up for next time you would do that exercise (more weight, shoot for more reps?). For this reason, there's just a standard way to do a MR. If you were to just hit failure in kind of willy-nilly way when training a small muscle groups (and/or differently for different muscle groups, depending on the day, the exercise, etc.) and thus had to differentially adjust the weight during the MR, potentially doing a different number of reps for each weight, it's a bit of a mess trying to gauge progress (ala progressive overload). It might come out in the wash for a beginners, but being able to meticulously grind out progress over the course of weeks and months is where progressive overload makes the difference for someone who's fighting tooth and nail for every extra pound of muscle.
-The pump sets are where you can really go to town on smaller muscle groups and isolation exercises, but perhaps be less punishing when doing compound exercises. This is all auto regulated and the Pump sets are where you can incorporate partial reps, holds under stretch, stuff like 21's and just about whatever kind of intensification technique you want to as long as the tension is continuous. In other words, the Pump Sets can go "beyond failure" if you chose to do so in that after you can't do any normal reps, you do partial or do a mechanical drop set (change from DB flies to DB presses once you can't get any more reps with the fly movement.) You could even go to failure and then do an isometric hold in the stretched position if you wanted to. OTOH, deepening on the muscle group, your state of recovery, the exercise, etc. it could just be a high rep set (continuous reps) as long as you're getting about 15-20 reps at a minimum. (Pump sets are at at the highest end of the rep continuum in FT.)
So, your point is such a good one that I built it into the program! LOL
-S
It is interesting though how we can perceive or think of things differently. When I think of "annihilating a muscle" I don't really think of volume, I think of an extreme amount of tension (especially on the negative) so you have one of those workouts where the goal is muscle damage. I mean I was sore until yesterday since my saturday leg workout and I only did 7 total sets. Conversely, a lot of people in this thread are reference volume but I don't really equate that with annihilating a muscle.
Absolutely Agee. And I should point out I’ve also tried hammering my muscles with heavy negative reps, forced reps and rest pause and it didn't shock my muscles into new growth. Not that there’s anything wrong with those training techniques. I’m just saying regardless of what ever training protocol you decide to use—annihilating the muscles does not make the muscle grow as good over the long haul as just stimulating the muscles within reason. Same rule applies to steroid dosages and protein intake. There’s a point of diminishing returns and once you go past that point, it works against you rather than helping you. More is not always better. And sometimes more is worse.
This honestly seems like mostly an execution issue regarding joints and tendons.
I agree that you can get away with more volume in your training training by using strict form like Roman Fritz vs. training with very explosive reps like Ronnie Coleman. How many intense work sets ( not including warm up sets) does Roman do on average per week for a given body part? For example, triceps.
I looked up Roman Fritz’s training method and he does around 20 sets twice a week per body part. That’s a total of 40 sets per week.
What have you found works best for people you train regarding split, frequency, high/vs low volume etc?I looked up Roman Fritz’s training method and he does around 20 sets twice a week per body part. That’s a total of 40 sets per week.
I am of the opinion that if you need 40 weekly work sets to make a particular muscle grow, you’re doing something wrong. That said, if you have good genetics, anything will pretty much work if you stay consistent with it. I tried 40 sets per week for each major body part when I was younger and became massively overtrained. My joints and tendons hurt just thinking about it at age 60.
