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.
You know we’re not rats correct
Anyone can mate - it’s a work capacity and activation issue purely.ah, one guy can do that....so that means everyone can to!
Must’ve missed the part where the pic you posted was rodents.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.
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
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.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
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.
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 likeman 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.
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?
No it’s not a sub category of progressive overload.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
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.
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'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.No it’s not a sub category of progressive overload.
That is again volume load.
Nope you just literally don’t understand that volume doesn’t increase the load on the muscle.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.
How does lifting a weight 6 times in stead of 3 times not increase load on a muscle?Nope you just literally don’t understand that volume doesn’t increase the load on the muscle.
Nope you just literally don’t understand that volume doesn’t increase the load on the muscle.
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.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
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.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.