A few queries I have...
- Thread starter SameOldSameOld
- Start date
Sci
Well-Known Member
For HST Rihad...
WHat exactly are you doing in your training? It would be interesting to see your actual workout logs, so I can understand your approach to training. The theoretical discussions are hard to follow, its easier to just track your training log. Please post a few training sessions...exercises, sets, reps, weight used..etc.
For me, this theoretical discussion of 6rm load vs. 5rm, how many total reps and stuff, is really useless without some training logs to actually see how the training works out in the REAL WORLD GYM. I have changed my mind many times about training after discovering what didn't, and what did, work for me over the years. The gym is really like a lab, and tracking your progress in the gym is critical, imo.
WHat exactly are you doing in your training? It would be interesting to see your actual workout logs, so I can understand your approach to training. The theoretical discussions are hard to follow, its easier to just track your training log. Please post a few training sessions...exercises, sets, reps, weight used..etc.
For me, this theoretical discussion of 6rm load vs. 5rm, how many total reps and stuff, is really useless without some training logs to actually see how the training works out in the REAL WORLD GYM. I have changed my mind many times about training after discovering what didn't, and what did, work for me over the years. The gym is really like a lab, and tracking your progress in the gym is critical, imo.
HST_Rihad
Active Member
I haven't yet tried that but I'm planning to, starting tomorrow 
Please see my training log for a more detailed answer.
Please see my training log for a more detailed answer.30 reps at that intensity will destroy your CNS.
Like Totetanz & I keep saying, you are basing your theories on Wernbom, which is an error-filled analysis of actual scientific studies, which themselves are limited and often poorly conceived.
HST_Rihad
Active Member
I'll only be hitting 30 reps for bis & tris - 15 as part of compound movements, 15 more in direct iso work... If I notice overuse problems (strength dropping, etc.), I'll cut iso work down to 10 reps total, or lower their load for some metabolic work at 10-15 reps per set.
And how about when training 2 times per week? Such volume at 85% is indeed probably only meaningful for folks with decades of training behind their backs.
Sci
Well-Known Member
Rihad, maintaining higher volume is fine, as long as you can. BUT, I always end up dropping volume once I get into the 5s. I usually do something like 2x15, 3x10, 6x5, 5x5, then once the loads get really heavy, I just keep dropping volume. So I go from 5x5 to 3x5, to 1x5, when doing the 1x5 portion of the cycle, I do an additional drop set of 10 reps, to get some extra TUT in for the muscles.
So, yes, do 30 reps per exercise throughout the cycle, but as you get close to your 5rm, then start dropping volume, or you will overtrain.
So, yes, do 30 reps per exercise throughout the cycle, but as you get close to your 5rm, then start dropping volume, or you will overtrain.
HST_Rihad
Active Member
Sci, do you also do 3x10 with your 10RM loads?
Since I won't probably be working true 5RM, but rather 3x5/3' RM, I hope I'll be fine. I wonder just how useful 1x5 is. There has been much spoken about minimum effective volume per bout... which is the main reason I'm endeavouring to do this 3x5/3' thing.
Since I won't probably be working true 5RM, but rather 3x5/3' RM, I hope I'll be fine. I wonder just how useful 1x5 is. There has been much spoken about minimum effective volume per bout... which is the main reason I'm endeavouring to do this 3x5/3' thing.
HST_Rihad
Active Member
Hi, Alex. Just making sure we really speak the same language: by 1x5 on inclined bench press you mean 5RM at RPE-10, where the last rep is slowest it can get, and you can do 2 such sets 3 minutes apart 5 reps each, right? Then you must be superman
Hi, Alex. Just making sure we really speak the same language: by 1x5 on inclined bench press you mean 5RM at RPE-10, where the last rep is slowest it can get, and you can do 2 such sets 3 minutes apart 5 reps each, right? Then you must be superman
And why is that?
Your 5RM is clearly RPE - 10 (putting aside the dubious use of RPE as a pseudo-quantitative measure). 'Slowest it can get' is again, a qualitative assessment and entirely subjective. If you do your 50RM to the 50th rep I promise you will state RPE is 10.
I could point you to any number of people on these forums you could manage 3 sets of their 5RM with 3 minutes of rest apart.
Totentanz had it right: try harder.
In addition//alternatively, try caffeine, better pre-workout nutrition, creatine.
If you're defining 5RM as the 5th rep being failure, then you're defining it incorrectly and don't understand the definition of an xRM.
HST_Rihad
Active Member
.
Yes, I see no reason why you're bringing up this example. RPE-10 is simply defined as a rep It doesn't get any harder than.
I do drink coffee before w/o and take CM.
Nope, just as I wrote: RPE-10 is slowest (barely moving) load done to completion.
5RM can probably be RPE 9-10. They are equivalent in that a person will not be able to do their 6-th rep fully after that. But they are different in terms of time spent & CNS exhaustion achieved.
Last edited:
I'm not sure where you picked up that RPE 10 is particularly slow moving, but that's news to me. It also implies RPE 10 cannot be achieved for explosive or dynamic movements, ala Olympic lifts.
RPE 10 is simply the upper most limit of 'effort', graded on a (wholly subjective) scale. Yes, you can accomplish three sets of five reps using a load that is the biggest you can move for 5 reps. It is absurd to propose that the greatest load you can move for five reps cannot be moved for five reps, three times, or if it can, then you must be able to move a higher load still for 5 reps only.
Your 5RM and 3x5/3' RM are going to be the same. If you can't manage that, then it's due to either lack of applied effort (working less hard than you are capable of doing), or lack of conditioning with regard to your nervous system. Given you are used to training at 2 sets and no more, that isn't surprising (and it's nothing to be ashamed of ffs), but there isn't a difference in load between 1x5 and 3x5/3'.
The exception to this would be exercises performed at the end of your workout when you are likely drained of energy and CNS ability due to the acute effects of working out, but then at that stage, I imagine your 1x5 and 3x5/3' are still the same, they're just both going to be lower because you're shredded from spending an hour doing deads, rows, dips, db press etc and mightn't have energy left for random bad isolation exercise.
RPE 10 is simply the upper most limit of 'effort', graded on a (wholly subjective) scale. Yes, you can accomplish three sets of five reps using a load that is the biggest you can move for 5 reps. It is absurd to propose that the greatest load you can move for five reps cannot be moved for five reps, three times, or if it can, then you must be able to move a higher load still for 5 reps only.
Your 5RM and 3x5/3' RM are going to be the same. If you can't manage that, then it's due to either lack of applied effort (working less hard than you are capable of doing), or lack of conditioning with regard to your nervous system. Given you are used to training at 2 sets and no more, that isn't surprising (and it's nothing to be ashamed of ffs), but there isn't a difference in load between 1x5 and 3x5/3'.
The exception to this would be exercises performed at the end of your workout when you are likely drained of energy and CNS ability due to the acute effects of working out, but then at that stage, I imagine your 1x5 and 3x5/3' are still the same, they're just both going to be lower because you're shredded from spending an hour doing deads, rows, dips, db press etc and mightn't have energy left for random bad isolation exercise.
Last edited by a moderator:
HST_Rihad
Active Member
Yup. I called this "lack of strength endurance", you call it "lack of NS conditioning".
For now, I couldn't care less about strength, let alone strength endurance/NS conditioning. All I care about is muscle growth. So, no, I'm not ashamed of not pushing giant loads.
Interesting. Here you're confirming that acute effects of wearing out CNS do exist, a second ago you claimed it's no problem working at maximum intensity of 3 sets of 5's w/3 minute rest? May I ask you how you warm up before your 5RM bench? If you don't warm up properly then it isn't your true 5RM, so no wonder the second set 3 minutes after comes no harder than the first.
HST_Rihad
Active Member
There's the culprit. Despite the increased risk of tearing, IIRC muscle is capable of achieving 85-90% of its maximum strength when it's "cold", i.e. no proper warm-up sets with progressively increased loads have been done. HST FAQ suggests this setup, which I've been following:
Totentanz, if your question merely meant "5RM is relative to what you're capable of at the moment, so 5RM is 5RM", then again, the first set works kind of like warm-up for the second (a very dangerous warm-up at that), so during second set you're properly warmed-up and that 5RM-wannabe is no longer 5RM, but is still heavy enough due to some fatigue from set one.
Last edited:
Load = muscle growth stimulus. Ignoring this may as well mean you ignore everything Bryan (or anyone else here) has hypothesised. Why do you think we SD? It isn't because of volume, it's because of load.
Of course there are acute effects to using your CNS. It's called cause & effect. Unlike you, I don't think the effects are so great that you are disabled from your 5RM after completing the first set at that weight. The acute effect I refer to is how the CNS is affected at the end of your workout, not one set. I'd argue there's negligible impact after just one set.
I warm up with a scheme similar to the one you've quoted, generally 50% & 75% with full range of motion movement for the arms before hand.
At some point you will have to accept that your 5RM can be satisfactorily completed 3 minutes after the previous completion ...
Last edited by a moderator:
HST_Rihad
Active Member
We SD because muscle gets conditioned to the load+volume and accumulated fatigue slows down further progress greatly. There are a couple of ways to progression, at least load or volume. Combination of load+volume is important. Load growth is important as long as one can keep up enough volume. If all this weren't true, I'd do only one heavy set of 5's and go home. This hasn't worked... it worked up to a point. True, I didn't utilize higher rep drop sets at that time, it probably wouldn't have mattered very much.
Sure, when my fitness levels get close to genetic limits. Nothing wrong about that.
I don't warm up that much and I never have problems. I warmup with 135 for 8 reps or so for bench, rows, rdls and similar. For squats, I do 135 for 5, then 225 for 5, then move on to working loads. I warmup with 315 for 5 then 405 for 3 on deads, then move on to my working loads... never had an injury in the gym. Warming up shouldn't be half your workout. Warm up means getting the muscles literally warm, and priming the cns for the movement by doing it with a lighter load. Doing too much of a warmup could in theory cause you to be weaker when you hit your working loads. I find this to be the case for deads and squats with people I've lifted with in the past, when they end up doing 5-10 warmup sets before they even get to their working load.
But doing less of a warmup is not going to cause your 5 RM to be lower unless you are doing no warmup at all, then it might have some effect but I really think you pulled that 85-90% figure out of your ass. You do know that people lift up cars and **** like that during crisis situations all the time right? How is some 120 lb girl suddenly able to out lift Benni Magnusson just because a car fell on her dad's chest? It's because strength is limited psychologically. And if you are dying after your first set of 5 reps with your 5 RM then it is most likely a psychological barrier. This is why I recommend everyone try max singles on deads, squats and bench at least once in a while because it helps you get beyond that so you can learn to truly push yourself. It's just like benching without a spotter. Your 5 RM is lower if you don't have a spotter and aren't benching in a rack with safety bars. Because you psychologically limit yourself.
But doing less of a warmup is not going to cause your 5 RM to be lower unless you are doing no warmup at all, then it might have some effect but I really think you pulled that 85-90% figure out of your ass. You do know that people lift up cars and **** like that during crisis situations all the time right? How is some 120 lb girl suddenly able to out lift Benni Magnusson just because a car fell on her dad's chest? It's because strength is limited psychologically. And if you are dying after your first set of 5 reps with your 5 RM then it is most likely a psychological barrier. This is why I recommend everyone try max singles on deads, squats and bench at least once in a while because it helps you get beyond that so you can learn to truly push yourself. It's just like benching without a spotter. Your 5 RM is lower if you don't have a spotter and aren't benching in a rack with safety bars. Because you psychologically limit yourself.
Nope.
We SD because the muscle tissue becomes resistant to further growth at the load you are using, and since at the end of an HST cycle, we can no longer increase the load as we have reached our 5 RM, we must SD to reset the load tolerance of the muscle tissue so that it will grow at lower loads. Does the HST article say anything about volume in the section on SD? No, it doesn't.
Apparently you haven't been studying your bible passages closely enough.
No, SD is NOTHING to do with volume, it explicitly regards load.
In fact, I once chatted w/Bryan w/regards to random moving-house-day I had to do in the middle of my 2nd cycle ever. Long story short, I have to deadlift & carry a fridge up some stairs. One time trip obviously. I asked Bryan how this would affect my cycle and SD into load progression into SD again. He said I should just SD immediately as the tissue had already been exposed to a load beyond my 5RM for deads at the time and I had basically rendered void any potential hypertrophy I might get from progressing through my cycle using those muscles (glutes, bi's, upper back, lower back, traps). The length of that carry was probably 2minutes. How many times? Once. It's all about load.
You stopped growing because you weren't eating enough and were scared about getting fat (add in pressure from your mother, according to your own words). I don't understand why you continually ignore the studies posted on here, mostly by Bryan, that show the irrelevance of extra volume w/regard to hypertrophy.
For compound exercises such as deadlifts, well-performed squats (ala proper glute activation), full-ROM rows and properly performed presses, a second set (or rather, higher rep count, as "sets" are a nonsensical approach to load application, given you are loading a muscle in order to grow and not a nerve) is entirely justifiable; you're unlikely to cause the same strain and//or achieve the relevant activation on accessory muscles such as lats (for rows), tri's (or even pecs for bad bench form) for presses etc. I agree that 5 reps is likely not enough TUT//work done once load threshold is reached. However, more than 12 is hard to validate, more than 15 harder still. If you merely want to work on form//love lifting then go for it. But for hypertrophy, it's likely that all you doing is conditioning the tissue more quickly and reducing the ability to grow from a given load before adaptations prevent growth using that load.
Totally agree w/all of this. Generally agree re: warmups as well. It's strictly to prime the relevant nerves and increase blood flow to the area. The same reason basketball players do shoot around, footy players do a few kicks at goal and maybe a half-jog around the field before a game etc etc. Furthermore, @ Rihad, there's extensive work into the impact of over-preparing and stretching, and the limitations this creates into performance, in addition to increased risk of injury.
And comment re: psychology couldn't be more accurate.