Search results

I wouldn't know if 3 sets of 10 with 2 minute rest are enough until I try them! So yes, if it falls short I will simply switch back to 3 sets of 5's with a fixed rest of 3 minutes, and add another 10 rep set until failure or close to it, to retain sufficient TUT. Limiting rest periods goes a...

Progressively longer as loads are getting heavier. It all started at 30-40 minutes, 70-80 minutes now during second week, I'm not expecting it to take more than 2 hours during max loads because I'm not going to go heavier than 8-10RM.

Taken today, bodyweight 64kg. Current routine: Squats 1x15 for two weeks then 1x10 Bench (incline) 3x10 2 minute rest Leg curls 1x15 for two weeks then 1x10 Pulldowns / Seated rows (alternated) 3x10 2 minute rest Dips 1x10 1-arm bent DB rows 1x10 Rack pulls (lvl 1) 1x15 for two weeks then...

Thank you too!

Sure, I liked 4 of your posts, tell me if you need more. I can already change my signature!

Lyle's prompt reply: I'm surprised how he's disregarding the increased rate of growth shown after the layoff, the whole purpose of SD to begin with. 3 weeks (used by this study) may be a little over of what's optimal not to lose too much muscle, though.

Anyway, I asked: http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showthread.php?p=267458#post267458

That's what I said :D "Most likely" means it isn't a hard fact. Nothing that I know of. It would be interesting to read. I can ask at Lyle's board and probably be banned :)

Uhm... Please read a bit more carefully the post you quoted. According to this conjecture, 12-15 *might* have shown better size gains than 10RM.

You mean 10RM loads fail to produce any relative size/strength gains at your level? When was the last time you tried? :) Sure, if your main goal is strength (as it seems to be) 10RM may not be ideal, calling for lower reps.

Harder on the power output required (strength), easier on total TUT (muscle size)? The principle of specificity at work: you get what you train for.

Here's what I get when choosing Settings / Signature in the menu: As this feature is relatively new it's gonna take a while before someone likes at least 1% of my total posts (907 at the moment, so I need about 10 posts liked by someone). Is there something that can be done about it? Or can...

Ditto. For someone interested in maximal strength gains within a time frame in a given movement, sure, but seems to be just about right for decent CSA gains. If we look closely at the graphs, the increase in strength was about 50% over baseline, while CSA showed only about 20% increase. Most...

adpowah, sure, if you can afford using twice as much time per time frame and if you're interested in lifting heavy for the sake of lifting heavy. I think strength gains while utilizing 10RM loads are indicative of whether they are appropriate at one's level of development. In other words, if...

http://weightology.net/weightologyweekly/?page_id=4705 A nice research showing how a group utilizing 3-week long SD (called by them periodic training) midway through weight progression in bench presses soon catches up with the continuous training group, and by the end of the 24-week long survey...

If SD allows people to use previous loads to achieve growth, then how come there are no weak yet well developed naturals around? ;)

Lean bodyweight of "height in cm - 100" in kilograms is actually a simple to remember formula. It's a bit more complicated than that of course. Read more about the numbers and the reasoning behind them here: Maximum Muscular Potential of Drug-Free Athletes

The weight gained is part of LBM so what you're essentially asking is why bother counting LBM gains. This goes along with increases in contractile fibers facilitated by enough nutrients. 68-70kg will be the second step :) That will most likely be around the max I'd ever want to be at and still...

Sure thing it gets lost when you don't eat that much or quit training, our bodyweight/size is a function of how much we eat. But bodyweight fluctuations depending on how full our bowels are isn't what I'm after - it's the gradual weight increase. Part of it is lean tissue, part of it is fat...

Cardio or not, that's what muscle mass is. You can't pick what's being added to (contractile elements' size/number or water-assisted "volume") - both are seen as lean tissue. Also you're hardly in a position to claim you aren't carrying *lots of* glycogen/water/fat storage given your bodyweight...