Hypertrophy training 7 days a week?

[OldManLogan]

I’ve been following this conversation with great interest, here’s something I’m trying to still understand- saw the video with Dr Scott Stevenson where he discusses training intensity in more detail- also reading through various threads here where we talk about intensity, high volume versus the Dorian/ JP approach, etc.

One thing I’m wondering is this- just like pain and pain tolerance are individual (and I assume will affect an individuals ability to reach true failure, 1 RIR, whatever)- then watched the Mentzer bicep training video someone posted here, where he mentions how one true failure set is all that is truly needed to give the muscle stimulation it needs to signal growth-

Is it fair to say that if you’re a person that struggles with all out intensity (compared to others), adding quality volume is the only other way to guarantee enough stimulus to send that growth signal?

In other words- are both approaches equally viable if done properly and all things being equal? And then it’s just a matter of figuring out which one works best for the individual (which one allows for better recovery, less injury or joint wear and tear, etc)?

 

[MajinBoo]

I’ve been following this conversation with great interest, here’s something I’m trying to still understand- saw the video with Dr Scott Stevenson where he discusses training intensity in more detail- also reading through various threads here where we talk about intensity, high volume versus the Dorian/ JP approach, etc.

One thing I’m wondering is this- just like pain and pain tolerance are individual (and I assume will affect an individuals ability to reach true failure, 1 RIR, whatever)- then watched the Mentzer bicep training video someone posted here, where he mentions how one true failure set is all that is truly needed to give the muscle stimulation it needs to signal growth-

Is it fair to say that if you’re a person that struggles with all out intensity (compared to others), adding quality volume is the only other way to guarantee enough stimulus to send that growth signal?

In other words- are both approaches equally viable if done properly and all things being equal? And then it’s just a matter of figuring out which one works best for the individual (which one allows for better recovery, less injury or joint wear and tear, etc)?

Both approaches are viable. But, in my opinion they are not equally.
To me it is a bit more nuance than this but to simplify:
- If you train with higher intensity, the maximum stimulus is achieved with less volume. But you will also be able to recover from less.
- If you leave few reps in reserve each set (less intensity), theoretically, to reach similar stimulus you would need to do more sets.

Now from here we can diverge in few different directions depending what you want to defend. You can find an argurment to justify training to failure is the most "efficient" but you can also justify a higher volume producing more results using the conclusions from studies where 2RIR and 0RIR produce similar gains and with 2RIR you could accumulate more volume and consequently more growth.

 

[qbkilla]

He said it better than me ^ lol

 

[qbkilla]

Both approaches are viable. But, in my opinion they are not equally.
To me it is a bit more nuance than this but to simplify:
- If you train with higher intensity, the maximum stimulus is achieved with less volume. But you will also be able to recover from less.
- If you leave few reps in reserve each set (less intensity), theoretically, to reach similar stimulus you would need to do more sets.

Now from here we can diverge in few different directions depending what you want to defend. You can find an argurment to justify training to failure is the most "efficient" but you can also justify a higher volume producing more results using the conclusions from studies where 2RIR and 0RIR produce similar gains and with 2RIR you could accumulate more volume and consequently more growth.

Damn, you summarized what I wrote in a much more concise way lol. This.

 

[OldManLogan]

Related to what I was referring to:

 

[PissedPajamas]

I think the best training approach is the one that makes sense for your situation and you enjoy. I’ve done higher volume (12-25 sets to failure) for the past few months and all I can think about is pulling the volume back to moderate volumes (10-15 sets to failure). No matter how much you try, unless you’re gifted with elite recovery genetics, you need to choose between going to failure and higher volumes.

If doing both, be prepared to feel fatigued outside of the gym, get sick easily, have a harder time sleeping, get a ton of GI issues and feel chronically stressed out. Theres probably a place for this type of training in an overreaching phase but its just not sustainable for the average meathead

 

[Dagmoon650]

Let’s suppose you run the following split:
Day 1 - Chest
Day 2 - Back
Day 3 - Arms, Delts
Day 4 - Legs
Repeat

Would it be a bad idea to continue rotating between these days without a rest day? Basically not having a planned rest day and training 7 days a week until your body asks for a rest.

Each muscle would have enough time to recover with this split even if no rest days are taken.

Only reason I’m asking this is because I hate taking rest days and that the target muscle would have recovered without an added rest day, especially since diet, sleep etc is locked in. CNS would be one argument against this but I don’t see why a planned rest would be beneficial as apposed to your body telling you to give it a break.

With this split i would be training with 3 exercises per muscle per session with 3 sets taken to failure per exercise which would be 18 working sets per week per muscle.

Heard people like Sam Sulek follow the same or very similar.

I don’t know who hurt you bro but no rest days is not the way