• All new members please introduce your self here and welcome to the board:
    http://www.professionalmuscle.com/forums/showthread.php?t=259
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
M4B Store Banner
muscleshop
Riptropin Store banner
Generation X Bodybuilding Forum
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Buy Needles And Syringes With No Prescription
Mysupps Store Banner
IP Gear Store Banner
PM-Ace-Labs
Ganabol Store Banner
Spend $100 and get bonus needles free at sterile syringes
Professional Muscle Store open now
sunrise2
PHARMAHGH1
kinglab
ganabol2
Professional Muscle Store open now
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
advertise1
granabolic1
napsgear-210x65
finestgears
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
ashp210
UGFREAK-banner-PM
advertise1
advertise1
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store
over 5000 supplements on sale at professional muscle store

Quads 3x/week?

Joltan

Active member
Registered
Joined
Jan 16, 2015
Messages
427
You know we’re not rats correct

I guess I must have missed the part of the study where they mentioned all this research was done on rats. Rats that are getting jacked doing quads 3x per week.

Thanks for pointing this out.
 

Performance Based

Well-known member
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Messages
2,429
ah, one guy can do that....so that means everyone can to!
Anyone can mate - it’s a work capacity and activation issue purely.

People get so wrapped up in this is “how” to train, bottom line you can’t just go from a bodybuilder bro split to specialized/niche/advanced athletic principles overnight.

Has to be adaptation periods along the way - but yes anyone can perform at an exceptionally high level multiple times per week.
 

Baphomet36

Well-known member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Aug 30, 2022
Messages
333
I guess I must have missed the part of the study where they mentioned all this research was done on rats. Rats that are getting jacked doing quads 3x per week.

Thanks for pointing this out.
Must’ve missed the part where the pic you posted was rodents.
You also don’t understand limitations of studies or real world application
 

Attachments

  • 67F1599D-5350-47FC-87B6-52313DA17613.jpeg
    67F1599D-5350-47FC-87B6-52313DA17613.jpeg
    21.6 KB · Views: 4

Performance Based

Well-known member
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Joined
Mar 3, 2011
Messages
2,429
I can train hamstrings even 3 times a week, but quads hard only once, maybe 1-2 light exercises on quads in the last part of the week - with higher frequency, after a few weeks I would not be able to walk with knee pain

We are at very different sides of the spectrum - so my curiosity is piqued. Do you incorporate durability work at all? IE banded movements to gap and rotate joint structures to increase elasticity of joint capsules/fascial layers?

I was an absolute mess with injuries/misc. pain until I started "bulletproofing" my joints and connective tissue. Your physique is extremely impressive and I know everything is dialed in; would additional movement (perhaps a durability day) work as an active recovery day or would it have a negative effect on the appearance of your physique?

Cheers mate
 

astrosfan123

Active member
Registered
Joined
May 16, 2014
Messages
276
No they have not concluded that higher volume is superior to lower volume.
Volume is not the primary driver of growth. I dont care what Mike isratel or anyone else who is trying to sell a program says
man after being a high intensity every work set to failure guy i was given a copy of that RP book they wrote. Even if it were true more volume is better, to me its just not enjoyable to rack the weight at 4 reps left. I also guarantee all these kids they got adopting the RIR method have no clue that their RIR 3 is probably RIR 7. Take the guesswork out and go to failure or 1 rep to it. Also there is the time constraint aspect of it. Adding sets as the weeks go by is just not something i want to do. After working a 12 hour shift i dont need to be in the gym for 2 hours accomplishing something i can do in half the time by going to failure every set lol. Needless to say that RIR stuff for me lasted a month ha.
 

rotinaj

Member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Jan 29, 2013
Messages
94
You could do it a million different ways but as long as you are balancing out recover, volume, and intensity you can certainly make that work just fine.

This. There are Olympia level competitors who only train them once a week.

Frequency has its place but if you’re training your quads with decent intensity there is no way you should be able to do this with taking ridiculous amounts of drugs to recover.

I think it’s important to remember that we grow outside* the gym.

Why would you do this? A full body high frequency split?
(I work certain muscles 6 days a week but they’re accessories and j do only 1-2 sets a day for reference.)

Personally I would probably end up in a hospital lol
 

FK86

Well-known member
Registered
Joined
Sep 17, 2017
Messages
1,060
man after being a high intensity every work set to failure guy i was given a copy of that RP book they wrote. Even if it were true more volume is better, to me its just not enjoyable to rack the weight at 4 reps left. I also guarantee all these kids they got adopting the RIR method have no clue that their RIR 3 is probably RIR 7. Take the guesswork out and go to failure or 1 rep to it. Also there is the time constraint aspect of it. Adding sets as the weeks go by is just not something i want to do. After working a 12 hour shift i dont need to be in the gym for 2 hours accomplishing something i can do in half the time by going to failure every set lol. Needless to say that RIR stuff for me lasted a month ha.
Mike is unnecessarily complicated with that approach. I feel like the entire lifting world has forgotten about sets across when it was what everyone pretty much did decades ago before Weider and Jones fucked everything up with their extremes around 1970. Taking an 8-rep max and trying to do 5x5, for example. Increase the weight when you can get 5 reps on all sets. It is so unbelievably straight forward and effective with no guessing. I guess it doesn't sound cool enough like

"Flip the switch for growth."

"Effective reps"

"Rest-pause"

A lot of posts in here referring to volume as number of sets. Reveals all too well these people exist in an echo chamber of Jones/Mentzer/Yates/Jordan Peters stuff. We know progressive overload and mechanical tension drive muscle growth, and yet some people posting in here and the Mentzer thread are ignoring the best methods for achieving so. An adequate workload is required for optimal muscle and strength gains. If one set to true failure was it, why has no strength athlete or coach in powerlifting, Olympic lifting, or strongman adopted it? Because it ignores other elements of development that occurs in the repeated effort method, synaptic facilitation, and the CNS just to name a few. Whose also to say that all the muscle fibers are recruited after one set to failure? For those that think it does, why are you doing more than one exercise per body part? Why are you doing a backoff set? I thought you flipped the switch in that first work set. Leave the gym and go home then. The biggest fail in bodybuilding was thinking that the training is different and special. Bodybuilders look the way they do primarily from diet, genetics, and drugs. Jordan Peters didn't get to 300 lb because he screamed his head off in the gym training to failure. It was because he took 6 grams of junk and ate his refrigerator every day.
 

Flex500

Well-known member
Registered
Joined
May 31, 2011
Messages
1,362
Progressive overload is this increasing weight or reps over time. It’s literally getting stronger.
Not fuck all to do with adding sets

Adding sets is called progressive volume load.
But I’m the one who doesn’t know what I’m talking about right?

Nothing says progressive overload can't relate to volume. Progressive volume load is simply a subcategory of progressive overload. Weights, reps, sets are all ways to progressively overload and it doesn't have to be in one set it could be by adding sets/frequencies (volume).

When I sat for my CSCS test the literal definition is/was increasing the weight, frequency, or number of repetitions in your strength training routine.


Can we use a real world example so I can ask what we are debating? Which is better to produce muscular hypertrophy/strength regarding deadlifts?

Week 1

Workout A

1 workout a week, 1 set of deadlifts to failure 465 x 13 (total poundage = 6,045)
This is an extreme level of "tension" within the set going to failure...it saves a lot of time

Workout B
1 workout a week, 465 for 7 sets of 3 (total poundage = 9,765)
This is quite difficult, but you never touch failure...but you move almost 4 thousand more pounds...also takes a lot longer



Week 2 Progression

Workout A

1 workout a week, 1 set of deadlifts to failure 465 x 15 (total poundage = 6,975)

Workout B
1 workout a week, 465 for 8 sets of 3 (total poundage = 11,160)


I'm curious which you all think is better? Is one overwhelmingly better? Neutral? Thoughts? Is this in line with what we are debating?


This is me right now FYI
 

Baphomet36

Well-known member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Aug 30, 2022
Messages
333
Nothing says progressive overload can't relate to volume. Progressive volume load is simply a subcategory of progressive overload. Weights, reps, sets are all ways to progressively overload and it doesn't have to be in one set it could be by adding sets/frequencies (volume).

When I sat for my CSCS test the literal definition is/was increasing the weight, frequency, or number of repetitions in your strength training routine.


Can we use a real world example so I can ask what we are debating? Which is better to produce muscular hypertrophy/strength regarding deadlifts?

Week 1

Workout A

1 workout a week, 1 set of deadlifts to failure 465 x 13 (total poundage = 6,045)
This is an extreme level of "tension" within the set going to failure...it saves a lot of time

Workout B
1 workout a week, 465 for 7 sets of 3 (total poundage = 9,765)
This is quite difficult, but you never touch failure...but you move almost 4 thousand more pounds...also takes a lot longer



Week 2 Progression

Workout A

1 workout a week, 1 set of deadlifts to failure 465 x 15 (total poundage = 6,975)

Workout B
1 workout a week, 465 for 8 sets of 3 (total poundage = 11,160)


I'm curious which you all think is better? Is one overwhelmingly better? Neutral? Thoughts? Is this in line with what we are debating?


This is me right now FYI
No it’s not a sub category of progressive overload.
That is again volume load.
 

astrosfan123

Active member
Registered
Joined
May 16, 2014
Messages
276
Nothing says progressive overload can't relate to volume. Progressive volume load is simply a subcategory of progressive overload. Weights, reps, sets are all ways to progressively overload and it doesn't have to be in one set it could be by adding sets/frequencies (volume).

When I sat for my CSCS test the literal definition is/was increasing the weight, frequency, or number of repetitions in your strength training routine.


Can we use a real world example so I can ask what we are debating? Which is better to produce muscular hypertrophy/strength regarding deadlifts?

Week 1

Workout A

1 workout a week, 1 set of deadlifts to failure 465 x 13 (total poundage = 6,045)
This is an extreme level of "tension" within the set going to failure...it saves a lot of time

Workout B
1 workout a week, 465 for 7 sets of 3 (total poundage = 9,765)
This is quite difficult, but you never touch failure...but you move almost 4 thousand more pounds...also takes a lot longer



Week 2 Progression

Workout A

1 workout a week, 1 set of deadlifts to failure 465 x 15 (total poundage = 6,975)

Workout B
1 workout a week, 465 for 8 sets of 3 (total poundage = 11,160)


I'm curious which you all think is better? Is one overwhelmingly better? Neutral? Thoughts? Is this in line with what we are debating?


This is me right now FYI

i guess i struggling thinking about that. Like how do you know you couldnt do 465 for 8 sets of 3 in week 1? You are just increasing a set to increase it. Is the body going to adapt week 2 to something you could have done week 1? Do you know you couldnt do it week 1? Idk probably just some over thinking on my end, ha. With that being said i just take the guess work out and go to failure.
 

Flex500

Well-known member
Registered
Joined
May 31, 2011
Messages
1,362
No it’s not a sub category of progressive overload.
That is again volume load.

You keep saying that but it's literally not true unless you are making up definitions. Adding sets (volume) is certainly a way to progressively overload.
 

Flex500

Well-known member
Registered
Joined
May 31, 2011
Messages
1,362
i guess i struggling thinking about that. Like how do you know you couldnt do 465 for 8 sets of 3 in week 1? You are just increasing a set to increase it. Is the body going to adapt week 2 to something you could have done week 1? Do you know you couldnt do it week 1? Idk probably just some over thinking on my end, ha. With that being said i just take the guess work out and go to failure.

I often like to do the 7x3 or 10x3 method so what I do is I only take that to the set where it's impeccable. If anything is off or too strained I stop for that week. Essentially really not going past an RPE ~7 or so. Every set looks like the first, if it doesn't I stop. Or in the case of week one above the 7th set didn't quite look like the first and I struggled with rep 3 so I chalk it up as done for the day and try to do more next time I basically keep doing that until I can get 10x3 and then up the weight. I can handle a ton of tonnage but it never approaches that brain shocking intensity of going to true failure.

It's an interesting thought experiment. I'm not saying one is outright better than the other I could make an argument for either...especially when you factor in time/efficiency.
 

Flex500

Well-known member
Registered
Joined
May 31, 2011
Messages
1,362
No it’s not a sub category of progressive overload.
That is again volume load.
I'm not trying to be difficult but even from the NCSA itself when you take the CSCS test one of the questions is what are different mechanisms to drive progressive overload and the answer is weight, reps, and volume.

That's fine if you disagree with them but the industry standard using volume (sets by means if intraworkout sets or increased frequency) as a means of progressive overload.
 

Baphomet36

Well-known member
Registered
Newbies
Joined
Aug 30, 2022
Messages
333
You keep saying that but it's literally not true unless you are making up definitions. Adding sets (volume) is certainly a way to progressively overload.
Nope you just literally don’t understand that volume doesn’t increase the load on the muscle.
 

alfresco

Featured Member / Kilo Klub Member
Featured Member
Registered
Joined
Jul 29, 2006
Messages
3,468
. . . picking rat shit out of pepper.

Skip the science and up the desire!
 

Elvia1023

Featured Member / Supp Guru / Board Supporter
Featured Member
Kilo Klub Member
Registered
Board Supporter
Verified Customer
Joined
Feb 27, 2008
Messages
25,922
I love training so over years I would train very high volume so I understand your body adapts over time. I have done brutal 2-3 hour leg workouts for months and loved them. None of the RIR crap either. There are some high level athletes who train 5+ hours every day. However we are talking bodybuilding on this forum... well 95% are. Yes you can train quads very frequently and there is no 1 answer to any of this but I am certain that for the majority of people they would get better results training them less frequently (2 hard sessions per week). Now this doesn't mean some pumpup/feeder sets or active recovery as that is different.

I know what the body is capable of but any of the guys who think you should go full of intensity with your quads 3 days per week simply doesn't train hard enough unless they are talking extremely low volume. You can go to failure 6 days per week if just doing 1 movement (mix of compound and isolation through the week) but a proper quad workout... I wouldn't recommend it. Yes it can be done but over time it will go likely against you especially the ones who don't have everything else at 100%.

Now for your standard gym goer workout go for it. For the guys who do your standard 3-4 movements including a squat variation and pushing it to the max your nervous system will be a mess. I know because I have done it and you just become tired constantly and it's not giving you more results so why bother. Hitting them hard twice (or even once) weekly is more than enough and if you want to include an active recovery day with that then great. Again there are no 1 answer fits all in bodybuilding but I just don't see the need.

If you want to do this for a short burst go for it and it may be good but long term it's not optimal imo. I know guys who have squatted hard every day for 1 month for example and got good results so there are many fun/crazy things you can do but for most on here they need to look at movement execution and intensity before they start training quads 3 times weekly hoping that will be the key to growth. Generally speaking your quads are very different to other muscles (hams, calves, arms) and if we are talking proper workouts I don't see the need. It could work if you rotated movements and possibly intensity but I don't see the need and it's just doing more volume/frequency for the sake of it.

You get these science guys who will say this and that but half the time they don't know the meaning of hard training. Their idea of working set is at least 5 RIR so sure you could do that 7 days per week and be fine.
 

Flex500

Well-known member
Registered
Joined
May 31, 2011
Messages
1,362
Nope you just literally don’t understand that volume doesn’t increase the load on the muscle.

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.
 

marssel

Sponsor / Kilo Club
Registered
Sponsors
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
2,775
Has anybody trained quads 3x a week? I've been training 2x a week and making good progress. I'm in my 40's now and do more volume training than HIT like I did when I was younger. I used to fry my legs 1 day a week and couldn't hardly walk until next leg day 6-7 days later. Now, I do still hard sets, just not beyond failure every single set, every single session. My legs are weakest bodypart.

Program for legs would be MWF for 2-3 training blocks (2-3 months). I train 5 days a week. Most other bodyparts would be trained at maintenance.

Monday - High bar squat 6-10 reps, 4-6 sets
Wednesday - Front Squat 10-15 reps, 4-6 sets
Friday - Leg extension 15-20 reps, 3 sets, Hack squats 10-20 reps, 3 sets

Looking for feedback on who it has work for or didn't work for. Things to look out for.

Thanks
Your old way sounds good this new way, imo, will ensure your legs are always your weakest body part. That schedule I wouldn’t really even consider training legs, just using them a little 3 times a week brother.
 

marssel

Sponsor / Kilo Club
Registered
Sponsors
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
2,775
I love training so over years I would train very high volume so I understand your body adapts over time. I have done brutal 2-3 hour leg workouts for months and loved them. None of the RIR crap either. There are some high level athletes who train 5+ hours every day. However we are talking bodybuilding on this forum... well 95% are. Yes you can train quads very frequently and there is no 1 answer to any of this but I am certain that for the majority of people they would get better results training them less frequently (2 hard sessions per week). Now this doesn't mean some pumpup/feeder sets or active recovery as that is different.

I know what the body is capable of but any of the guys who think you should go full of intensity with your quads 3 days per week simply doesn't train hard enough unless they are talking extremely low volume. You can go to failure 6 days per week if just doing 1 movement (mix of compound and isolation through the week) but a proper quad workout... I wouldn't recommend it. Yes it can be done but over time it will go likely against you especially the ones who don't have everything else at 100%.

Now for your standard gym goer workout go for it. For the guys who do your standard 3-4 movements including a squat variation and pushing it to the max your nervous system will be a mess. I know because I have done it and you just become tired constantly and it's not giving you more results so why bother. Hitting them hard twice (or even once) weekly is more than enough and if you want to include an active recovery day with that then great. Again there are no 1 answer fits all in bodybuilding but I just don't see the need.

If you want to do this for a short burst go for it and it may be good but long term it's not optimal imo. I know guys who have squatted hard every day for 1 month for example and got good results so there are many fun/crazy things you can do but for most on here they need to look at movement execution and intensity before they start training quads 3 times weekly hoping that will be the key to growth. Generally speaking your quads are very different to other muscles (hams, calves, arms) and if we are talking proper workouts I don't see the need. It could work if you rotated movements and possibly intensity but I don't see the need and it's just doing more volume/frequency for the sake of it.

You get these science guys who will say this and that but half the time they don't know the meaning of hard training. Their idea of working set is at least 5 RIR so sure you could do that 7 days per week and be fine.
Agreed full intensity or even good let alone proper training would make doing it 3 times a week impossible and trying it would bring on atrophy and injury. If after kegs you can walk without struggling to and get in your truck, you failed in your lift. Yes still at 44 I believe chest back and legs should be pounded and that’s the best part anyway.
 

Forum statistics

Total page views
533,132,117
Threads
130,695
Messages
2,616,578
Members
158,360
Latest member
Fleezy
NapsGear
HGH Power Store email banner
Leader Powder Store email banner
Prowrist straps store banner
coach
FLASHING-BOTTOM-BANNER-210x131
raws
Savage Labs Store email
Syntherol Site Enhancing Oil Synthol
AQ3 email Banner
pomps
rawhormone
ezgif-com-resize-2-1
MA Research Chem store banner
MA Supps Store Banner
thc
Keytech banner
musclechem
Godbullraw-bottom-banner
Injection Instructions for beginners
Knight Labs store email banner
ODINBanner-PM1
ashp131
Advertise Here
Top