Revamping my training, how did you know it was time to jump off of the high intensity, train, and go the higher volume route?

[Aikman56]

i know thisll probably get ripped apart here and typically for good reason, but if this is the route you want to go i would actually really consider looking into the RP work. it seems to me that youd be a great candidate for that style of training base off so many factors: your age, your training history, your extreme dedication and consistency. to me based off those criteria, it would seem to be the best way for you to make progress based off what your trying to accomplish training wise.

Actually, I have the app and have been utilizing it as my “logbook“ for quite some time. It’s great. I’ve just never allowed it to “take the helm“ and push volume to where it wants to go. So not only are you not going to get ripped apart, I’m going to tell you that my brain is already there!

 

[Aikman56]

I’m actually in the same boat right now...going from a strict Dorian / Mentzer style of training (true single set to failure) toward a blend that looks more like what guys like Justin Harris or John Meadows did.

In fairness, I haven’t been as consistent the past few years as you’ve been, but for many years I was very much locked into the high intensity approach. I still believe in the principles...but I’ve come to see some issues...

• Mental fatigue: Running all out to failure with intensifiers every session is draining.
• Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy gap: You miss out on that layer of growth. Myofibrillar hypertrophy and sarcoplasmic hypertrophy are both real and distinct. Harris talks a lot about this, and I think most people underestimate it. It may just be a cosmetic thing...but...it's a thing.
• Volume balance: Meadows, to me, struck a really good mix. His programs might look high volume on paper, but the quality of effort per set was high, so it never felt like “junk volume.”

One thing I’d caution on is how people perform reps. A lot of “HIT” tendon / overuse issues come down to rushing the transition from eccentric to concentric. If you slow the negative (3–7 sec depending on the exercise), control the transition, then drive the positive, you take away most of that wear and tear. I’ve seen guys fix their tendon pain almost overnight just by tightening up their tempo.

I’d recommend you check out some of Meadows’ stuff like Pain and Suffering. That program is beating me up right now in a good way. I still take sets very hard, but it has enough volume and variety to spark growth again. Honestly, even if you look back at Mentzer’s own routines, the periods he grew the most were when he had a little more volume (his split with legs/chest/tris and back/shoulders/bis was still HIT style but not “just one set per muscle forever”).

I'm still a HIT guy at heart but I’m with you and I think there’s merit in revamping training at this point, especially for us who’ve been at this for decades.

So I should’ve said this from the outset, and it’s way too late to edit my initial post, but (many people know this) I worked with John from 2012 to 2015. Even after I stopped paying him, we still consulted a great deal and he remained a friend and a trusted Advisor until his tragic and untimely death a couple of years back. Good Lord, I miss that man… But I digress. I have nearly 30 (7, 8, 10-38)of his programs from the time we worked together. Maybe the best move is to dig one of those out and start over. Like I said, the majority of all of my time training has been the high intensity style, but that. Of three years that I worked with him, were some of the most productive in joint pain free times that I can remember. It’s been over a decade… Maybe it’s time to dust off some of those old plans.

 

[traininsane11]

Actually, I have the app and have been utilizing it as my “logbook“ for quite some time. It’s great. I’ve just never allowed it to “take the helm“ and push volume to where it wants to go. So not only are you not going to get ripped apart, I’m going to tell you that my brain is already there!

How do rate the app overall? Do you find it’s accurate in telling you what adjustments to take in regards to progressive overload each week and volume adjustments? (I know you said you don’t follow it like that but interested to see how accurate it may be regardless) and how set is it or can you programme your own workouts into it and it adjusts them based on your feedback

 

[buck]

Am I simply becoming a crazy old man that should just accept successfully staving off sarcopenia as the victory?

I am 65 so crazy old man staving off sarcopenia seems to be my only choice. Real gains stopped long ago.
I trained high volume in my early years made great gains but that was popular up to the 90's.
Spent years doing high intensity chasing gains, but to a lesser degree as the easy big gains come early.
When the joints/tendons were unhappy about intense heavy workouts.
Segwayed back to higher volume. Keep trying to learn how to move weight optimally. Enjoy my workouts more. The soreness makes me think i have actually done something and have regained/filled out some lost tissue. Although no great amount.

 

[Aikman56]

Thanks for all of the great discussion and input!

 

[Aikman56]

How do rate the app overall? Do you find it’s accurate in telling you what adjustments to take in regards to progressive overload each week and volume adjustments? (I know you said you don’t follow it like that but interested to see how accurate it may be regardless) and how set is it or can you programme your own workouts into it and it adjusts them based on your feedback

I actually like it very much. I think it is definitely worth the money and is a great tool. They are constantly updating and upgrading it… Whether someone likes Mike or not (I happen to love the guy… He’s nuttier than squirrel shit, but he does make some good points and he’s very entertaining.), the app is functional, dependable, and really does a much better job than one might imagine in estimating & recommending weight progressions. I feel like it would probably operate even more efficiently if I would let it do what it wants to do with volume. I guess we’re going to find out!

 

[Aikman56]

I am 65 so crazy old man staving off sarcopenia seems to be my only choice. Real gains stopped long ago.
I trained high volume in my early years made great gains but that was popular up to the 90's.

That’s about the timeframe that I started training. My freshman year of high school, 1991–1992… In fact, this Christmas Eve will be 36 years to the day since I started training!

At any rate, what was happening in the bodybuilding landscape at this time was “the Dorian Revolution. And since he was my favorite bodybuilder early on, I did everything he said. And it worked during those initial years… Of course, a lot of that was probably newbie gains, as well! But I think my joints would be a whole lot happier today, and I would probably be somewhat larger, had I emulated a little more Lee Haney, Shawn Ray, & Jay Cutler through the years.

 

[traininsane11]

I actually like it very much. I think it is definitely worth the money and is a great tool. They are constantly updating and upgrading it… Whether someone likes Mike or not (I happen to love the guy… He’s nuttier than squirrel shit, but he does make some good points and he’s very entertaining.), the app is functional, dependable, and really does a much better job than one might imagine in estimating & recommending weight progressions. I feel like it would probably operate even more efficiently if I would let it do what it wants to do with volume. I guess we’re going to find out!

Interesting thank you may give it a try out of curiosity to see how close what I would do myself aligns up with the science of the app

 

[buck]

That’s about the timeframe that I started training. My freshman year of high school, 1991–1992… In fact, this Christmas Eve will be 36 years to the day since I started training!

At any rate, what was happening in the bodybuilding landscape at this time was “the Dorian Revolution. And since he was my favorite bodybuilder early on, I did everything he said. And it worked during those initial years… Of course, a lot of that was probably newbie gains, as well! But I think my joints would be a whole lot happier today, and I would probably be somewhat larger, had I emulated a little more Lee Haney, Shawn Ray, & Jay Cutler through the years.

I started lifting around 1973. Just a dumb kid that didn't know how to train or eat. Arnold was king and so was volume. My gains slowed to a near stop then came Dorian. And chasing single digit yearly gains became my new norm.
I tend to think volume works better in general. But in the end what a person gravitates towards is what they like to do and will apply themselves to the best i find. But i have pretty much got something from every new style of training i have done. But the gains only came for a short time after switching up. Trying something new can be invigorating.
My dosages and calories are far from what they were. I just try to enjoy my lifting the best i can. Now aerobics is another thing as there is still no joy on being on a machine but there are options there as well.
Hope you enjoy your new journey.

 

[comedycentral]

That’s about the timeframe that I started training. My freshman year of high school, 1991–1992… In fact, this Christmas Eve will be 36 years to the day since I started training!

At any rate, what was happening in the bodybuilding landscape at this time was “the Dorian Revolution. And since he was my favorite bodybuilder early on, I did everything he said. And it worked during those initial years… Of course, a lot of that was probably newbie gains, as well! But I think my joints would be a whole lot happier today, and I would probably be somewhat larger, had I emulated a little more Lee Haney, Shawn Ray, & Jay Cutler through the years.

One thing I would ask and forgive if I didn’t notice you’d said it already but if you train Dorian style now are you doing body parts once a week with low volume high intensity ?
If so have you considered a spell of increased frequency not to complete failure?
At 50 my joints give me grief trying to go heavy balls out but now I do higher reps with about 4-5 sets per muscle group twice a week not to complete failure. I have actually made small but some progress putting a little size on whilst keeping body fat about the same.
Your only way to know is give something else a solid run 3 months min and reevaluate how you feel look scale weight injuries etc.

 

[Aikman56]

One thing I would ask and forgive if I didn’t notice you’d said it already but if you train Dorian style now are you doing body parts once a week with low volume high intensity ?
If so have you considered a spell of increased frequency not to complete failure?
At 50 my joints give me grief trying to go heavy balls out but now I do higher reps with about 4-5 sets per muscle group twice a week not to complete failure. I have actually made small but some progress putting a little size on whilst keeping body fat about the same.
Your only way to know is give something else a solid run 3 months min and reevaluate how you feel look scale weight injuries etc.

No, not exactly. Over the past few years I’ve gradually segued to more frequency, but still with low volume and high intensity. I did fortitude training for a couple of years and then fell back into training for five days a week hitting a body part twice a week with Low volumes with high intensity/intensifiers. Throughout my contest prep (this past May through end of August) I eliminated the intensifiers, but kept the same split… For instance, Monday, push, Tuesday legs, Wednesday push, Thursday off, Friday push and quads, pull and hamstrings, Sunday off.

The point I was making in my initial post was that I’m going to increase overall volume, not training to failure. From what I can glean, if one is going to utilize higher volumes, it’s best to stop a set with one or two reps left in the tank. Didn’t mention frequency, but frequency will be staying where it is.

 

[comedycentral]

No, not exactly. Over the past few years I’ve gradually segued to more frequency, but still with low volume and high intensity. I did fortitude training for a couple of years and then fell back into training for five days a week hitting a body part twice a week with Low volumes with high intensity/intensifiers. Throughout my contest prep (this past May through end of August) I eliminated the intensifiers, but kept the same split… For instance, Monday, push, Tuesday legs, Wednesday push, Thursday off, Friday push and quads, pull and hamstrings, Sunday off.

The point I was making in my initial post was that I’m going to increase overall volume, not training to failure. From what I can glean, if one is going to utilize higher volumes, it’s best to stop a set with one or two reps left in the tank. Didn’t mention frequency, but frequency will be staying where it is.

Can I ask. You do 3 push sessions to one pull and legs per week? Is this to bring up lagging parts

 

[Sectør]

Following this as just in the process of doing the same to hopefully facilitate more progress and minimise the chance of injury!

I don’t really have anything to contribute personally

BUT this is Justin Harris’s take on it when describing his reasoning behind his critical mass programme


This is a high frequency, dual-focused training program where myofibrillar and
sarcoplasmic hypertrophy are both targeted. The body is trained over 3
workouts, which each workout placing its focus on those two aspects of muscle
growth—increasing contractile strength through progressive overload and
increasing non-contractile growth through increased blood flow and nutrient
partitioning. The routine is meant to be performed exactly as listed. Movements
are to be in the order listed, and in the set order listed. There is enough allowed
variation in the “additional movements” and set number/methods to keep the
routine feeling fresh for the duration of the program.
This program can be utilized for an arbitrary length of time. The limiting factor to
progression and results will be one’s ability to continue improving in strength for
the movements being used. Once strength plateaus are reached and progress
begins to stall, it is recommended that a short “de-load” is taken where the user
backs off on the intensity and workload for as long as necessary before restarting
the program with the same core structure, but with different exercises.
Program Focus
The focus of this program is purely on increasing muscular size. There is a strong
sub-focus on increasing the strength of the worked muscle, but only in the
manner that an increase in contractile strength leads to an increase in muscle
size. Each workout places some focus on progressive overload as well as some
focus on sarcoplasmic growth—or “blood volume” training. The way in which this
program tracks progress and looks for growth is as follows:
1. Making a muscle stronger.
This means that the muscles performing the movement are getting
stronger—not that you have become more biomechanically efficient in the
movement. There is a difference between getting stronger in a movement
and making a muscle stronger. Getting stronger in a movement can occur
because of improved mechanical advantage, neurological adaptation,
better supporting equipment, variations in diet, rest time between sets,
and location of the movement in the workout (first exercises vs last
exercise). Getting stronger because of a stronger muscle means that no
outside changes have occurred that would improve your strength in a
movement. The same form is used, the same machine is used, the same
rest period is used, etc. This type of strength increase is MUCH slower and
less obvious than simply getting stronger in a movement. However, it is
MUCH more closely correlated to an increase in muscle size. A stronger
contractile tissue is largely the result of an increase in muscle proteins that
make up the contractile tissue of the muscle.
2. Making a muscle’s sub-components larger.
This doesn’t necessarily mean that we are always focused on setting PRs in
every exercise. There is some aspect to training that is unrelated to
muscular strength but increases the size of a muscle. It is hard to argue
that there isn’t some benefit to non-strength increasing training that
focuses on increasing blood flow to the trained muscle, looks to increase
the “pump” of that muscle, and likely produces as much or more DOMS as
the training that focuses on making a muscle stronger.
3. The structure of the program is this:
All red colored sets are “PR sets” or “myofibrillar sets.” Your primary focus
in these sets is hitting a PR without any change to form, rest time, or any
other variable other than muscular strength. You MUST hit at least one PR
in the “core” movement (squats, bench, deadlifts) every single workout.
You SHOULD hit at least one PR for every single body part. You should TRY
to hit a PR in every red colored set of every workout.
All black colored sets are “hypertrophy sets” or “sarcoplasmic sets.” The
goal in these sets isn’t necessarily to get stronger, but rather to bring blood
flow to the tissues and get as good of a “pump” as possible. Strength
increases in these sets will be happily accepted, but that is not the primary
goal of the sets.
Day-to-Day Focus of the Program
While the general approach to this protocol is progressive overload, there are
multiple adaptations in which a muscle group grows larger. If you were to slice
through the cross-sectional area of a muscle group in half, you would see that the
majority of the “muscle” is not contractile tissue, but instead a conglomerate of
fluid volume, blood vessels, capillary density, and other non-protein components.
While increasing the contractile strength of the associated proteins will indirectly
increase the size of these components as well, there is a more direct approach to
stimulating the growth of the non-contractile muscle components. This is where
the daily workout programming becomes important.
How can we maximize training frequency without the risk of over training and
injury? Clearly there is a point where a muscle can be trained—and trained
relatively intensely—without a physiological level of DOMs. This is the key to
increasing the frequency of training, maximizing the rate of strength increases,
and stimulating the maximum amount of muscle protein synthesis.
How is this approached?
1. The part of training that the “bro-split” gets correct is the need for
increased blood flow to the trained tissues and the delayed onset muscle
soreness associated with high intensity, higher volume training. Training
frequency can be maximized if muscle soreness is minimized—but that
does not also optimize the synthesis of new muscle tissue—it only
maximizes the number of times in which a PR can be attempted. There is
some benefit to the increased volume that comes with training a body part
to the point of noticeable soreness.
2. The part of training that the “bro-split” gets incorrect is that most people, if
they’re training reasonably hard under a reasonably high workload, they’re
probably creating a stimulus for new protein synthesis that is higher than
their recovery and diet can cover. If this were not the case, then for any
given training program, an increase in training volume should create a
correlating increase in muscle growth—but this isn’t the case. This is also
the explanation for why so many top bodybuilders seem to be able to train
with limited intensity while still growing—because most people are training
harder than they can locally (locally as in the short term) cover completely
through diet and rest.

These few excerpts you Provided are absolutely gold. I really appreciate this

This is turning into a great thread

 

[Aikman56]

Can I ask. You do 3 push sessions to one pull and legs per week? Is this to bring up lagging parts

Sorry, that was a typo. I’m trying to do too many things at once… It should’ve said…
Monday – push
Tuesday – legs
Wednesday – pull
Thursday – off
Friday – push/quads
Saturday – pull/hamstrings
Sunday dash off

With regard to “bringing up lagging body parts“… My entire physique is lagging body parts. Specializing on one would be like spitting into the ocean.

 

[Flex500]

So I should’ve said this from the outset, and it’s way too late to edit my initial post, but (many people know this) I worked with John from 2012 to 2015. Even after I stopped paying him, we still consulted a great deal and he remained a friend and a trusted Advisor until his tragic and untimely death a couple of years back. Good Lord, I miss that man… But I digress. I have nearly 30 (7, 8, 10-38)of his programs from the time we worked together. Maybe the best move is to dig one of those out and start over. Like I said, the majority of all of my time training has been the high intensity style, but that. Of three years that I worked with him, were some of the most productive in joint pain free times that I can remember. It’s been over a decade… Maybe it’s time to dust off some of those old plans.

I'm in columbus and saw John often (although our relationship wasn't based so much around bodybuilding and more around politics, normal life stuff, etc). Seeing him train live really made me think about some things and I just always thought he blended the HIT/DC/Dorian sort of mindset well with volume. He was a great guy...I really didn't get to know him until the last couple years before he passed.

 

[TheOtherOne55]

This past offseason i made a full switch from pretty much JP-like progressive overload training to not log booking at alll. Did that for a full 18 months. a VERY different approach that what i had been used to. Slightly more volume, more pump work, taking everything to failure with some added intensity techniques but not living and dying by "beating what i did last session."

Honestly, i enjoyed it a lot. I wasnt as anxiety ridden as before, dreading upcoming leg days. I looked forward to trying NEW movements and new pieces of equipment. And it worked, i DID gain 15lbs that offseason without being hyper focused on numbers. My only change to this new offseason is basically trying to keep 1 progressive overload compound movement at the beginning. Basically like a hammer incline that i try to progress or a T-bar row or something like that.

 

[megroo]

I have Also spent most of my time with the DC, hit , Dorian mindset.
There’s just something about that style of training that makes you feel good.


However, I’m in my 40s now, and i have in the last 6 months or so transitioned into more volume…
3 sets per exercise 2-3 exercises per bodypart, twice per week/ 8 days. Ppl

Aiming for 8-10 reps with the same weight- first set may be 2rir, 2nd set 1rir, then last set failure.
No intensifiers. Maybe perhaps on small muscles like biceps or calves if I feel recovered enough.

I find this a good mix of volume and intensity, I still get to log my lifts and the variation with 2 rotations keeps me on my toes.

I also find my joints feel much better, my knees were in agony from heavy leg pressing etc.
I don’t need to take a week off or deload. I can add an extra day off if needs be.

 

[hawkmoon]

I’ve noticed a few comments above that highlight overtraining, and that can certainly be an impetus to change methodologies.

My original comment, however, goes in a somewhat different direction than yours, @Aikman56.

I started out high-volume—six days a week, including a period of training twice a day when my only goal at 20 was to turn pro.
Obviously, I couldn’t keep that up and still have a real life. After I gave up on pro aspirations, I cut back to five days a week, then eventually four, with single sessions.

I maintained that schedule while staying around 212–220 lbs, content to hold steady.

When I competed again in 1997, I ramped back up to five days a week with more volume in pursuit of progression. It worked well enough, and I was satisfied with the results.

After moving to Japan and finding PM in 2008, I also discovered Dante and DC training. It immediately appealed to me, especially since I’d been interested in Mentzer’s writings when I was younger. My asthma also makes long sessions miserable, so shorter, more intense training fits me better. At 20 I used to knock out 12 sets of squats on leg day - those days are long gone.

When I decided to compete again in 2018, I had already been training DC for a few years, but I cranked it into high gear and made significant progress, despite being in my late 40s. Now, at nearly 56, I still train this way and continue to find it incredibly effective. For me, it strikes the balance between load and recovery that allows me to keep progressing, as much as is realistic at my age.

All that said, I recognize that high-intensity, shorter workouts don’t suit everyone. Some people find them boring, some feel they’re not doing enough, and for others it can easily lead to overtraining.

What @traininsane11 shared from Harris resonates with me—except for the emphasis on sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. Probably heresy to say it, but I don’t see solid evidence it exists. We get a pump, sure, but that’s temporary fluid engorgement, and it dissipates. I don’t see a biological reason why the capacity to store fluid would meaningfully outstrip the contractile tissue it’s meant to support. For lasting fullness on stage, I’ve gotten far more from increased glycogen storage thanks to PEDs and improved muscular efficiency and nutrient uptake.

TL;DR: I started out high-volume, ended up with HIT, and made some of my best gains in my late 40s. The key for me has been balance.

 

[Aikman56]

I’ve noticed a few comments above that highlight overtraining, and that can certainly be an impetus to change methodologies.

My original comment, however, goes in a somewhat different direction than yours, @Aikman56.

I started out high-volume—six days a week, including a period of training twice a day when my only goal at 20 was to turn pro.
Obviously, I couldn’t keep that up and still have a real life. After I gave up on pro aspirations, I cut back to five days a week, then eventually four, with single sessions.

I maintained that schedule while staying around 212–220 lbs, content to hold steady.

When I competed again in 1997, I ramped back up to five days a week with more volume in pursuit of progression. It worked well enough, and I was satisfied with the results.

After moving to Japan and finding PM in 2008, I also discovered Dante and DC training. It immediately appealed to me, especially since I’d been interested in Mentzer’s writings when I was younger. My asthma also makes long sessions miserable, so shorter, more intense training fits me better. At 20 I used to knock out 12 sets of squats on leg day - those days are long gone.

When I decided to compete again in 2018, I had already been training DC for a few years, but I cranked it into high gear and made significant progress, despite being in my late 40s. Now, at nearly 56, I still train this way and continue to find it incredibly effective. For me, it strikes the balance between load and recovery that allows me to keep progressing, as much as is realistic at my age.

All that said, I recognize that high-intensity, shorter workouts don’t suit everyone. Some people find them boring, some feel they’re not doing enough, and for others it can easily lead to overtraining.

What @traininsane11 shared from Harris resonates with me—except for the emphasis on sarcoplasmic hypertrophy. Probably heresy to say it, but I don’t see solid evidence it exists. We get a pump, sure, but that’s temporary fluid engorgement, and it dissipates. I don’t see a biological reason why the capacity to store fluid would meaningfully outstrip the contractile tissue it’s meant to support. For lasting fullness on stage, I’ve gotten far more from increased glycogen storage thanks to PEDs and improved muscular efficiency and nutrient uptake.

TL;DR: I started out high-volume, ended up with HIT, and made some of my best gains in my late 40s. The key for me has been balance.

Pretty much everything you’ve said here is the conceptual paradigm under which I’ve been operating for years… And the reason I’m thinking of switching isn’t clinically evidentiary , it’s more empirical/observational.

Piggybacking on what was being said by you and previous members around Justin Harris’ comments, I went back and listened to a couple of his interviews and I think I’m going to follow logic, and go for a mixture of styles…

With regard to sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, (to quote Carl Sagan) “absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence.”

Someone said that on Paul Barnett’s recent Instagram post about the pump not just being downstream evidence of hypertrophic stimulation, but being one of severalcausal factors. While I subscribe wholeheartedly to mechanical tension being the primary driver of myofibrillar hypertrophy, I also believe and contend that sarcoplasmic hypertrophy DOES exist.

Either that, or volume is another way (or perhaps a more complete way) to stimulate lower threshold motor units. Well, I’m quite certain body does not necessarily work this way, I think about a teenager in a six speed muscle car winding 1st and 2nd gear up to 6500 RPMs and then skipping 3rd gear to slide directly into 4th.

Then I think perhaps volume allows us to “go back” and spend some time in 3rd.
And I know, clinically intellectually, that’s an idiotic thought on its face because motor unit recruitment occurs from low threshold to high threshold, in sequence. Henneman has been telling us that since ‘57 and that has long been the accepted wisdom.

However, in 2005 Gregory and Bickel published “Recruitment Patterns in Human Skeletal Muscle During Electrical Stimulation”. There, the authors contended:

“electrical stimulation recruits motor units in a nonselective, spatially fixed, and temporally synchronous pattern. Furthermore, it synthesizes the evidence that supports the contention that this recruitment pattern contributes to increased muscle fatigue when compared with voluntary actions. The authors believe the majority of evidence suggests that EMS-induced motor unit recruitment is nonselective and that muscle fibers are recruited without obvious sequencing related to fiber types.”

Now, I realize that this was done with the MS, but I can’t help but think that something similar must be taking place in the day-to-day physiology of what we do.

I keep thinking about Justin’s analogy of a steak versus beef jerky. And while I agree that the pump sarcoplasmic swelling are temporary in the immediate, I think there’s something to the concept/hypothesis of “creating space” for myofibrillar hypertrophy.

Maybe I’m right, maybe I’m wrong, maybe I’m just an old dude on the toilet at 5AM with nothing to do.

What I do know is that I’m turning 50 in January, my muscle-building window is closing, and at the worst, these changes aren’t going to HURT my progress.

 

[Duke309]

Actually, I have the app and have been utilizing it as my “logbook“ for quite some time. It’s great. I’ve just never allowed it to “take the helm“ and push volume to where it wants to go. So not only are you not going to get ripped apart, I’m going to tell you that my brain is already there!

Are you going to let the app run your program or are you still going to dictate things yourself? I'm curious to see how you react to the app running things if that is what you chose to do.