Low Frequency Training

[jeroendebleser]

How old are you and what are your exact goals? I got your username mixed up when first posting thinking you were much older. But aren't you only in your 30's? Do you have high goals or just want to look good on a beach? Sometimes we make suggestions on here geared towards guys wanting the highest goals and also for people who love the gym but not everyone is in that bracket.

As posted there are many different ways to go about things. As Daniel posted more frequent training is better for most bodybuilders. It doesn't mean it's better for everyone but I generally feel the same as well. I personally like high frequency. For me that could be main body parts trained twice weekly. Then the likes of calves could be double or even daily. Everything overlaps as well so are often hit much more than just their given days. For my body different muscles also respond best to certain frequencies and rep ranges so my routines are set up with that in mind. Although the key factor is what you do during a session as if you go over that line you may struggle to recover in time for your 2nd session of the week. That's why ensuring you recover quickly through effective sleep, supps, diet (etc etc) is key to all of this.

I also agree with Dante and if you can train your chest twice weekly and recover then it's always going to be better than once weekly. Although that brings us back to why you are not recovering properly. I would look closely at your diet and well everything. But at the same time if you feel like training less go for it as everyone is different. Maybe mentally you just want a break and less volume and frequency for a few months. You could always rotate to the opposite if you feel like more workload afterwards. Plus we do overcomplicate this stuff on here. We heard about x training but half the guys looks exactly the same as they always did. I am also all about execution and feel it's very importanr but look at all the guys who preach that stuff. It's not like they made bad bodyparts good. It's not like they are the biggest and best bodybuilders. Most of the best bodybuilders are the ones who keep everything simple but just grind away constantly.

So these days I am all for doing what you feel like even if it doesn't make as much scientific sense. Look at the scientific trainers half of them look exactly the same after years of following their own systems. None of this stuff is really complicated. You only learn if you try new things and as you stated so what if it doesn't work it's not like you will lose all your muscle. Plus this is coming from someone who loves volume and frequency and rotates through the year but generally I am not a fan of low frequency as I personally don't see the point unless you have many responsibiles (family, work, travel etc) so can only fit in the gym a few times every week. Although even in that case I would opt for full body routines, upper/lower, p/p/l etc.

Agreed on everything as usual I know higher frequency is better (in theory at least, my personal experience with it is that it doesn't really matter whether you train bodyparts once, twice or thrice a week. (Isn't that also the latest scientific conclusion? When equated for volume, the training frequency didn't matter?) It does however matter for my weak ass joints.

So far I'm liking it actually. It's too soon to tell obviously but my guess is that once again, it will turn out that it doesn't matter what I do training-wise (I clearly said I here, not saying this is going to be the case for all of you), as long as you're training hard and not overtraining/recovering.

To give the 2 most extreme examples possible, I'm guessing there will be no difference in results for me between Phil Hernon's daily full body training (training everything 7 times a week) and this (training everything only once every 2 weeks or so). My prediction could turn out to be totally off but I seriously doubt that.

 

[jeroendebleser]

I train by instinct as far as how much recovery time I need before training a certain body part again. Lately, two consecutive days of weight lifting is all my elbows and wrists can handle. They swell up and it’s painful just moving around.
I go a minimum of 7 days in between body parts, and a maximum of 10 days on legs and 9 days on upperbody parts. I’m bulking on a clean diet, and this is working out well for my body. I only do this type of frequency due to age. I’m 51, and my body doesn’t recover very quickly.
I’m on 300mg sustanon and 150mg deca.

I'm in the same boat mate, I'm only 35 though LOL

 

[jeroendebleser]

damage remodel damage remodel damage remodel.....

Thats the key....why in all hell would you want to accomplish in 2-3 years what you can accomplish in 1?

So you want to do 26 workouts for chest hypothetically in the next year of damage remodel damage remodel instead of 52 to 78 to 104?

Do you go 30 miles an hour in a 60 mph zone also to get someplace in 2 hours instead of one?

Your problem is not thinking out your recovery ability and continually overtraining instead of being intelligent about this and adjusting your workload so you can recover.....and damage remodel damage remodel frequently.

Why stop there? Take it all the way....train chest once a month.....while that guy over there trains chest 4-8 times a month and flies right by you.

Then why stop at 104? Why not 365 days then, basically what Phil Hernon is doing currently? (fullbody workouts daily, he even advises NOT to take days off)

 

[jeroendebleser]

Great post.

OP, look into Dr. Scott Stevenson's research on training frequency. In general, more frequent training is better for most bodybuilders.

Fortitude training must be about the only thing I've never done haha but it sure looks interesting. Might look into it once I'm done with my current experiment.

 

[jeroendebleser]

This is my same experience. I will take 1-3 weeks off if i'm burnt out, ridiculously busy, or have a minor injury like a sprain or small tear, i come back refreshed and feeling stronger/more motivated than ever. It does the mind and body a lot of good.

A lot of guys think that if they take a few days or weeks of they are going to shrink and lose all their gains. Same goes for missing a meal, it's an anal/ocd mentality that is very common in this game.

This sport attracts OCD'ers (and narcissists).

 

[b-boy]

Then why stop at 104? Why not 365 days then, basically what Phil Hernon is doing currently? (fullbody workouts daily, he even advises NOT to take days off)

Phil Hernons program is only like 1 maybe 2 exercises (1 working set) per bodypart. I loved his training system, I got strong as fuck, especially my squats. 1 set of 20 rep squat's
daily was definitely not over reaching for me.

 

[Equalizer]

If you want to take things to the extreme, Tom Platz stated he used to train his legs every 2 weeks do the intensity he used during those workouts. You can hear him take about it during this interview. Roughly the 6 minute mark for that discussion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMfhGiPG3Eo

 

[Beti ona]

This is my same experience. I will take 1-3 weeks off if i'm burnt out, ridiculously busy, or have a minor injury like a sprain or small tear, i come back refreshed and feeling stronger/more motivated than ever. It does the mind and body a lot of good.

A lot of guys think that if they take a few days or weeks of they are going to shrink and lose all their gains. Same goes for missing a meal, it's an anal/ocd mentality that is very common in this game.

That is why it is good to take breaks from training and even fasting for 24 hours, it is a kind of liberation against our mental bonds.

 

[Dens228]

I used a routine based on a "Story time with Lats" which was a low volume high frequency two way split. 2 on 1 off. I made very good gains for several weeks until I started feeling run down. When I'd slow it down and start it back up it was shorter and shorter times until I was feeling beat up.

I'm now on a three way split, 2 on 1 off. Have been for almost two years. I love it.

 

[Biggerp73]

a muscle conditioned and strengthened to be able to perform lots of reps and sets with a ton of weight is going to be larger than a muscle conditioned and strengthened to only perform a couple sets with a the same amount of weight.

 

[TheOtherOne55]

a muscle conditioned and strengthened to be able to perform lots of reps and sets with a ton of weight is going to be larger than a muscle conditioned and strengthened to only perform a couple sets with a the same amount of weight.

IMO the volume frequency intensity debate is dependent on how "skilled" of a lifter you are. If you're new to training you probably have poor mind muscle connection. Intensity is going to be tough for you so you probably do need more volume to fully destroy the working muscle. But if you are advanced which I hope most guys on this forum are, than 1-2 hard working sets per exercise is more than enough.

The older I get, the more all of this shit makes sense. I listened to a podcast interview with Justin Compton the other day where he said at his peak he would do around 20-30 sets per workout. He also was only hitting a BP once a week. So to me, it's like digging a ditch. He can train his chest once a week and dig a really big ditch....the next 6-7 days are spent trying to fill that sucker back up. OR he could maybe hit chest twice a week with 10 sets where he would only need 2-3 days to fill up that smaller ditch. Obviously he trained intense as fuck. But everyone just has to play around with their volume and frequency IF they train as hard as possible.

 

[Equalizer]

Phil Hernons program is only like 1 maybe 2 exercises (1 working set) per bodypart. I loved his training system, I got strong as fuck, especially my squats. 1 set of 20 rep squat's
daily was definitely not over reaching for me.

You stayed with the same exercises and rep range each workout with that routine, or did you rotate different ones from day to day?

 

[Biggerp73]

IMO the volume frequency intensity debate is dependent on how "skilled" of a lifter you are. If you're new to training you probably have poor mind muscle connection. Intensity is going to be tough for you so you probably do need more volume to fully destroy the working muscle. But if you are advanced which I hope most guys on this forum are, than 1-2 hard working sets per exercise is more than enough.

The older I get, the more all of this shit makes sense. I listened to a podcast interview with Justin Compton the other day where he said at his peak he would do around 20-30 sets per workout. He also was only hitting a BP once a week. So to me, it's like digging a ditch. He can train his chest once a week and dig a really big ditch....the next 6-7 days are spent trying to fill that sucker back up. OR he could maybe hit chest twice a week with 10 sets where he would only need 2-3 days to fill up that smaller ditch. Obviously he trained intense as fuck. But everyone just has to play around with their volume and frequency IF they train as hard as possible.

Yes but with very few exceptions, the largest and best physiques have always been built on high volume, high intensity, heavy weights, and once per week training. And a muscle capable of lifting like that is going to be larger than one that isn't. It's simple physics.

 

[buck]

Yes but with very few exceptions, the largest and best physiques have always been built on high volume, high intensity, heavy weights, and once per week training. And a muscle capable of lifting like that is going to be larger than one that isn't. It's simple physics.

While that was my favorite way to train, I put on 40 pounds of muscle by training more then once a week with no PEDS. And there have been guys like Arnold , Ronnie and others that trained multiple times a week.

 

[DOGGCRAPP]

Yes but with very few exceptions, the largest and best physiques have always been built on high volume, high intensity, heavy weights, and once per week training. And a muscle capable of lifting like that is going to be larger than one that isn't. It's simple physics.

How is that simply physics...that is simply your opinion. The majority of bodybuilders have done high volume simply because of the "obsessive compulsive principle"....everyone wants to get so big so badly they do massive amounts of sets and overdo everything with absolutely no rhyme or reason.....except the notion of "i must do this and that and that over there and those things and a bunch of this stuff in todays workout" or i wont get big. Take it to the bank that if a higher power came down and said "here we took all the guesswork out of it for you and here is the definitive intensity, sets and reps you should be doing for ultimate muscle mass gain"......that bodybuilders all over the world would like clockwork add sets to that proven equation because its always a "more is better" thought mechanism with bodybuilders.

So if a bunch of bodybuilders have proven that they themselves have gotten massive with low volume and also bodybuilders have gotten massive doing high volume.....it stands to reason that the high volume bodybuilders wasted alot of unproductive time and work to reach the same result....a result they could have reached if they didnt go into the gym with this obsessive compulsive thinking that 98% of bodybuilders get who do way too much (because they want it so bad).

22 sets of the wrong exercises done will never come close to beating 8 sets of productive exercises that puts a person in the best mechanical positions for his unique body......and until someone PROVES exactly how much workload is needed at what intensity to result in the greatest hypertrophy....(which nobody on earth has even gotten close to solving that equation)....the key is the number of times you can train a bodypart hard enough to signal a hypertrophy response, recover, and train again <----doing way too many sets doesnt help that equation at all and just delves into the recovery time period....

Sadly juiced bodybuilders think they have all the answers because the juice and the gh make all the answers for them......try to take a natural guy and have him train with high volume and see what happens to him....if he CAN actually do it and recover, Ill show you a guy who thinks he trains hard but doesnt....and if he can actually train hard enough to create a growth response he will drive himself into an overtraining ditch very quickly with high volume. And whatever is the absolute correct training to create the ultimate hypertrophy response in a guy who is natural is the EXACT correct training which he should be doing when he is sauced (just with an incredible growth promoting environment). But again guys who juice think they have it all figured out because the juice gives everyone the answer no matter if they train absolutely wrong or absolutely right.

Dorian and others believed in lower volume, others believed in higher volume....and to this day nobody has ever shown the exact volume X intensity that is needed to create the ultimate size gain....so why go from point A to point B in 120 minutes when you can get there in 60 minutes. I know what younger guys do ....and what Arnold did and everyone back in the day did....and it wasnt done thru science it was done thru crazy obsession of wanting something so bad that they "think" this huge amount of sets might be the best way to go about it. There would be no massive low volume trainers if that was the best way to go about it.

I am up for what everyone wants to do in their training if they feel strongly about it or more importantly ITS WHAT THEY LIKE TO DO.

But these "this is the best" statements? Nope.....Has never been proven by anyone but what has been proven is it can be done with low volume and high volume.....and I dont personally like to paddle 1000 times across the lake when i can paddle 500 times and get there in the same time frame but hey to each his own.

 

[Biggerp73]

It's simple physics because the potential capacity for a physical object to move another object, in terms of it's weight, the force at which it is moved, and the amount of times its moved, is directly related and limited by the size of that object (with other factors like elasticity, etc, also playing a role as variables, too).

You can defend your system all you want, and no doubt it works for some, but I know I've tried both ways of training while natty and while juiced, and while I do find there to be a point past which additional volume becomes counter productive, I find for myself optimal growth occurs with a volume of 8-15 working sets, requiring 6-8 days between working sessions.

And please don't dismiss the 99% of pro BBrs who have trained this way (ie high volume) by saying "they can get away with it because they have great genetics." One could easily say the only reason guys benefit from your style is because they, like Dorian, Mentzer, etc, had great genetics.

 

[b-boy]

You stayed with the same exercises and rep range each workout with that routine, or did you rotate different ones from day to day?

Same exercises, Phil likes to use exercises that involve moving your body through a plane, examples... squats instead of leg press, pull ups instead of pull downs, dips instead of triceps pushdowns, pushup instead of bench press.

 

[Equalizer]

It's simple physics because the potential capacity for a physical object to move another object, in terms of it's weight, the force at which it is moved, and the amount of times its moved, is directly related and limited by the size of that object (with other factors like elasticity, etc, also playing a role as variables, too).

You can defend your system all you want, and no doubt it works for some, but I know I've tried both ways of training while natty and while juiced, and while I do find there to be a point past which additional volume becomes counter productive, I find for myself optimal growth occurs with a volume of 8-15 working sets, requiring 6-8 days between working sessions.

And please don't dismiss the 99% of pro BBrs who have trained this way (ie high volume) by saying "they can get away with it because they have great genetics." One could easily say the only reason guys benefit from your style is because they, like Dorian, Mentzer, etc, had great genetics.

Are those 8-15 sets ramping sets with the last set of each exercise being the heaviest?

 

[Biggerp73]

Are those 8-15 sets ramping sets with the last set of each exercise being the heaviest?

No, those are working sets (warm ups excluded). Most of them stop 1-2 reps shy of failure.

 

[johnjuanb1]

If you want to take things to the extreme, Tom Platz stated he used to train his legs every 2 weeks do the intensity he used during those workouts. You can hear him take about it during this interview. Roughly the 6 minute mark for that discussion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMfhGiPG3Eo

I had a friend with 33” inch quads. He said Tom Platz taught him his routine.
It was twice a week leg training.
One day very heavy in the 6 rep range.
The next time 20 rep range.