Training Volume

[aHarness]

Could you please post your routine/split and sets/reps? I'm curious about this and always looking for ways to improve. Thanks Bro!

Hey did you end up finding those vids, or did you still want me to write out an example day?

 

[psychor]

Hey did you end up finding those vids, or did you still want me to write out an example day?

I can look him up on youtube but haven't had time yet. Thanks again for sharing Bro!!

 

[Type-IIx]

So correct me if I'm wrong, this means people with poor genetics require more volume to gain than those with good genetics?

You are not wrong.

 

[Type-IIx]

I agree it's hard to quantify volume. Like say I do skulls, hit failure then use the bar to rep out 10 close grips to my neck then immediately start doing tricep pushups all in a row...no rest ..is that 1 set, 3? No idea. Or a dropset. I think the science is now saying time under tension isn't a driver of hypertrophy...but the same science guys say pump work or sarcoplasmic hypertrophy matters...so confusing lol

What matters above all else for hypertrophy is effort at a sufficient volume under the effective reps model in exercises that stimulate the desired target muscles.

Time under tension as it's thought about commonly by bodybuilders, in terms of slowing down the lowering (eccentric) and raising (concentric) portions to increase it, is just not a means to enhance hypertrophy. This is because it is totally unrelated to the force-time integral of maximal voluntary contractions that scientific research shows is related to mechanical tension in a muscle fiber and resultant hypertrophy.

This is to say that intentionally changing the speed at which you lift and lower weights of different magnitudes (e.g., heavy, light), doesn't matter, since the muscle fiber pulling forces that generate growth (hypertrophy) only respond to the last few high effort (i.e., maximal) reps of any set. Since these require the same signal as very fast lifting speeds with respect to the signal your brain sends to the motor neurons to lift the weight, slowing down submaximal reps doesn't do anything in terms of hypertrophy.

Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, unrelated to "hypertrophy" as increases to the size of myofibrils, is important because we care about the aesthetic of the body rather than the mechanics of the muscle cells. Increases in cell volume due to fluid shifts and enzymatic structures still affect (potentially enhance) aesthetics.

 

[OuchThatHurts]

As far as I can tell, when they put me on the docks in college, it was so intense that they would only allow 4-6 hour shifts. Burn through a gallon of water nightly. By the end of that first summer, I had very little size improvement but I was hard as nails. Added lifting and a year later, nobody in their right mind would mess with me. My younger brother made states wrestling and he would break me down every time on the mat. But after that year, he tried to get me in a guillotine and I didn't skill my way out of it at all, just sheer power. And we've never grapped since,

It takes a brutal intensity. I think it was Emeric who said, "Motivation can be your best friend or your worst enemy." Your mind can will you to your greatest gains, or terrible injury. But the strongest dudes I've been matched with are blood, sweat, and tears strong. And they will break any bodybuilder. I've seen it.

Go to school all day, unload all night, and train. Take an ice bath every night. But not for a 3month run of test and primobolan, but PDEs or not, work your ass off. You could have taken a 2x4 to my back and all it would have done is piss me off.

It's why I still wear work boots to the gym. Get to work.

 

[marssel]

Yeah it must have been that, not the 8-10 Advil tablets a day every damn day for years on top of the massive PEDs use. Right.

Fuck I don’t think I take 10 Advil a year!!! I must have missed that lol

 

[qbkilla]

What matters above all else for hypertrophy is effort at a sufficient volume under the effective reps model in exercises that stimulate the desired target muscles.

Time under tension as it's thought about commonly by bodybuilders, in terms of slowing down the lowering (eccentric) and raising (concentric) portions to increase it, is just not a means to enhance hypertrophy. This is because it is totally unrelated to the force-time integral of maximal voluntary contractions that scientific research shows is related to mechanical tension in a muscle fiber and resultant hypertrophy.

This is to say that intentionally changing the speed at which you lift and lower weights of different magnitudes (e.g., heavy, light), doesn't matter, since the muscle fiber pulling forces that generate growth (hypertrophy) only respond to the last few high effort (i.e., maximal) reps of any set. Since these require the same signal as very fast lifting speeds with respect to the signal your brain sends to the motor neurons to lift the weight, slowing down submaximal reps doesn't do anything in terms of hypertrophy.

Sarcoplasmic hypertrophy, unrelated to "hypertrophy" as increases to the size of myofibrils, is important because we care about the aesthetic of the body rather than the mechanics of the muscle cells. Increases in cell volume due to fluid shifts and enzymatic structures still affect (potentially enhance) aesthetics.

I agree on no point in varying speed of lifting the weight and increasing tut that way being a factor.

What are your overall thoughts on high volume type routines such as Milos giant sets, nubret type workouts, and higher reps in general "pump training" but done to failure?

 

[Mufasa123]

Concentric failure means exactly jack shit at the stimulus level. Jones and Mentzer and everyone else applied logic to an incorrect understanding of physiology. If you use "failure" as a limit to try to increase the workload (volume and intensity/1RM%) I guess it's useful for simple measurement but it is not in any way a stimulus and accretive (it was the work not the failure).

 

[Type-IIx]

I agree on no point in varying speed of lifting the weight and increasing tut that way being a factor.

What are your overall thoughts on high volume type routines such as Milos giant sets, nubret type workouts, and higher reps in general "pump training" but done to failure?

I'd have to take a look at those training programs to express an opinion.

If "pump training," i.e., performing a high number of sets per body part (5 - 20+) with high repetition number (10 - 15+) and short rest periods (~30 - 60"), is done to failure, then that depletes muscle glycogen & phosphocreatine stores (and intramuscular triglyceride), that can be later supercompensated (i.e., resulting in storage above normal levels) when kcal, CHO, creatine (and dietary fat) are made available again.

This can be useful, and leveraged to peak, or to fill up.

If you're asking me to express an opinion of superiority/inferiority of one mode of training emphasis in any bodybuilding training program, I'm not likely to have one. I think that any well-designed training program can serve different ends, depending on context, you might emphasize heavy load training over pump training during different phases of the season (e.g., off-season vs. late into prep/peak weak).

 

[Golden]

Yeah it must have been that, not the 8-10 Advil tablets a day every damn day for years on top of the massive PEDs use. Right.

I remember reading he was in tremendous pain when he trained, that’s what led to his living on Advil.

I never knew if that pain was due to training so heavy for years with injuries or something else

Pretty sure that the Advil will have played a major part in addition to high BP in to why his kidneys were destroyed

 

[Golden]

You are not wrong.

for many years it was always preached that those harder gainers would require even less volume whereas now it appears that it’s more nuanced than that

 

[Type-IIx]

for many years it was always preached that those harder gainers would require even less volume whereas now it appears that it’s more nuanced than that

Good point; I think that the earlier view was preoccupied with the belief that underrecovery/hormonal factors were what primarily distinguished the endowed (hyper-responders) vs. the hypo- and non-responders. That was basically incorrect. Since then, genetic research and more work has been done to study the issue of inter-individual heterogeneity in response to resistance training. But still, a lot more has to be done, since unknown factors still persist that seem to shape response to anabolic stimuli.

 

[UnholyAlliance]

for many years it was always preached that those harder gainers would require even less volume whereas now it appears that it’s more nuanced than that

True, and everyone's different and will get different results even if using the same exact training program.

 

[Mufasa123]

I remember reading he was in tremendous pain when he trained, that’s what led to his living on Advil.

I never knew if that pain was due to training so heavy for years with injuries or something else

Pretty sure that the Advil will have played a major part in addition to high BP in to why his kidneys were destroyed

Tom had something wrong with his kidneys from birth. Just wasn't picked up. Obviously none of this helped but it was a matter of time until they failed advil/roids or not.

 

[Golden]

Maybe someone else can explain but watching some of Paul carters stuff and the way he makes mention of drop sets not further increasing hypertrophy over standard sets.

May be my understanding is flawed but if you go to failure with a weight, then drop and continue to failure again. How is this not pushing the muscle to further adapt?

 

[Doitagain]

Maybe someone else can explain but watching some of Paul carters stuff and the way he makes mention of drop sets not further increasing hypertrophy over standard sets.

May be my understanding is flawed but if you go to failure with a weight, then drop and continue to failure again. How is this not pushing the muscle to further adapt?

Regardless of the correctness of his statement, a muscle can “adapt“ to a certain stimulus not necessarily by means of hypertrophy.

 

[Mufasa123]

Maybe someone else can explain but watching some of Paul carters stuff and the way he makes mention of drop sets not further increasing hypertrophy over standard sets.

May be my understanding is flawed but if you go to failure with a weight, then drop and continue to failure again. How is this not pushing the muscle to further adapt?

Mechanical work is mechanical work. Failure and post failure mean absolutely nothing. In all cases for it to be relevant stimulus we need to perform some amount (volume) of work with a relevant level of intensity (%1RM). You walk a lot but it doesn't make you bigger because lots of volume with super low load.

For relevant intensity everyone is different but 60% to 70% of 1RM is a good lower threshold (say sets of 12-15 rep maxes).

So anyway let's say you go to concentric failure with your 15RM and then drop the weight, you are getting more volume and work but the weight eventually gets so light that's it's not heavy enough on the fibers to be stimulative. Yeah, the fibers are getting exhausted and tired but not from a valid hyperteoohy stimulus as there isn't enough tension or weight on them relative to their potential. Your central and peripheral nervous system remains hard at work and it's expensive work for little to no gain.

You'd be way better off saving yourself the effort, racking the bar and taking a few Mins to rest and then perform another set with the original weight which provided adequate tension.

Now that's the pure and proven science. It's unequivocal here and this is what drives long term progress. Concentric failure means NOTHING in and of itself and at best it is coincidental to progress but absolutely not causal. That said, sometimes techniques can be used to break through plateaus or help accommodation with the goal of eventually raising volume with a given weight, adding additional weight or both as capacity expands. Lots of stuff can work and I think that's where some of these techniques are useful and we've all seen that work at times and use them.

 

[UnholyAlliance]

Mechanical work is mechanical work. Failure and post failure mean absolutely nothing. In all cases for it to be relevant stimulus we need to perform some amount (volume) of work with a relevant level of intensity (%1RM). You walk a lot but it doesn't make you bigger because lots of volume with super low load.

For relevant intensity everyone is different but 60% to 70% of 1RM is a good lower threshold (say sets of 12-15 rep maxes).

So anyway let's say you go to concentric failure with your 15RM and then drop the weight, you are getting more volume and work but the weight eventually gets so light that's it's not heavy enough on the fibers to be stimulative. Yeah, the fibers are getting exhausted and tired but not from a valid hyperteoohy stimulus as there isn't enough tension or weight on them relative to their potential. Your central and peripheral nervous system remains hard at work and it's expensive work for little to no gain.

You'd be way better off saving yourself the effort, racking the bar and taking a few Mins to rest and then perform another set with the original weight which provided adequate tension.

Now that's the pure and proven science. It's unequivocal here and this is what drives long term progress. Concentric failure means NOTHING in and of itself and at best it is coincidental to progress but absolutely not causal. That said, sometimes techniques can be used to break through plateaus or help accommodation with the goal of eventually raising volume with a given weight, adding additional weight or both as capacity expands. Lots of stuff can work and I think that's where some of these techniques are useful and we've all seen that work at times and use them.

Very good post and something well getting to know about.

 

[qbkilla]

I see Paul Carter mentioned a lot, he has really gone low volume extreme and low rep lately. I just happened to be searching Google on poundstone curls and found this.

Apparently he was a low volume guy, switched to high rep pump work, had good results, was a believer, now is back then advocating low reps heavy weight and low volume?

Odd. I wonder why he keeps switching. Not a knock on him because people change opinions. I did find this old post to be spot on with my experience high volume pump work for delts arms small parts...

More on Poundstone curls, the origin of my high rep work, and shit you will never do

I've obviously been touting high rep curls for a while now. I've seen all sorts of comments from "what's the purpose of this?" to "this is ...

www.lift-run-bang.com

 

[qbkilla]

Just a heads up, Layne Norton has a damn good video on the recent absurdly high volume study. In summary he says many would benefit from increasing volume and talks about his past success with it. Never been a big Norton guy but it's quality content IMO