Dual Factor/Single Factor/Supercomensation/etc.

Discussion in 'Strength-Specific Training (SST)' started by savagebeast, Oct 3, 2005.

  1. savagebeast

    savagebeast New Member

    From the First 5x5 Cycle thread:

    Aaron, I'm not trying to argue with you here, just seeking some clarification about loading & deloading, dual factor training, and why this is not recommended "for beginers to intermediate lifters."

    Here are a few quotes from Pendlay. While I know he is not in favor of strict and carefully planned out periodization and unloading/deloading schemes for beginners and intermediates, it seems to me that he achieves the same effect, just without the meticulous planning.

    (http://forum.mesomorphosis.com/showpost.php?p=401451&postcount=2)
    (http://www.midwestbarbell.com/totalel....8&st=20)
    (I can't find a link but I saved it on my computer)
    How is any of this different from dual factor? The way I see it, Pendlay's training philosophy isn't all that complicated: start off with linear progression until you hit a wall and can't increase the weights any more, then alternate between periods of high volume and high intensity. During the high volume periods, it is hard to achieve PRs because of the accumulated fatigue. The high intensity periods that follow allow for supercompensation and achieving new PRs.

    Isn't this basically the same as dual factor or loading/deloading, just without the fancy periodization and advanced planning?
  2. Aaron_F

    Aaron_F New Member

    His initial ones are basically single factor, but as he goes thru in each thread he starts splitting the planning out into macro (months)rather than micro (weeks) cycles. You fatigue in the week and come back the following week after compensation and hit it again. In dual factor the weights are less likely to go up weekly, as you are trying to cause fatigue rather than achieve weekly gains in weight (as in single factor)

    and you will notice a reoccuring trend in pendlays posts

    adn i continues with other points that I have seen from him and his coworkers.

    They do basic stuff first and when that stops working they raise up and up.

    Much like westside start at rep effort stuff, then add in some max effort stuff and finally they add in dynamioc effort as the others stop producing gains.

    Starting with Dual factor adds another layer of planning (and complexity to get the fatigue and recovery levels just right) that is not needed with most people (and would not help most noobs). the DF program that Madcow has which is an old pendlay program is just one potential application that is written down for the masses. Does not mean its suitable for everyone or anything, or that the deload period is optimal for you, or the loading period is optimal or excessive. Its just a sample on how to set up a program with the focus on longer term.
  3. combat_action

    combat_action New Member

    I don't think duel factor "garbage" is too complicated either. I agree that it is not needed for a beginner since they'll progress no matter what. I've been doing DF for quite a while now and I wish I did something like this a long time ago instead of going balls to the wall for months and months at a time.

    Quote from a very uncomplicated writeup by Kelly Baggett
  4. savagebeast

    savagebeast New Member

    That's one thing I've noticed about Pendlay: he's real big on "if you can increase the weight on a weekly basis, do it." Only when this stops working does he suggest something else.

    So in a sense, it is dual factor, except on a much shorter time scale (weeks instead of months)?

    And now for a question about my own training:

    So I've been following Madcow's 5x5 variation. I'm fully aware that Madcow's 5x5 is not necessarily any more special than anyone else's 5x5 variation. I just happen to like his choice of exercises.

    Things were going great, but now I've pretty much reached the limits of my current strength; I don't think I can continue to increase the weight week to week with my current rep scheme. However, I've had no problems with the volume. Therefore, I'm thinking it would be best if I switched to a high volume phase for 1 or 2 weeks before entering into the intensity phase. This way I'll be a little worn out from the high volume so that when I enter the intensity phase I can take advantage of supercompensation.

    My plan for the "volume weeks" is to change it up to 5x5 with a fixed weight for all 3 days. If that doesn't tire me out, as I suspect it might not, I'll up the frequency. I was thinking maybe 1 on, 1 off, 2 on, 1 off, 2 on, then go to the intensity phase. This should be enough to get me tired out, but not overtrained.

    Does this sound like a reasonable plan?
  5. combat_action

    combat_action New Member

    Don't start to finger #### it.  If you are doing Madcow's version of the program, then you are in the volume phase, correct?  He uses alot of 1x5 pyramids, which is more for beginners anyways.  I'd say that once you are done with the volume phase, deload, then go straight into the intensity phase.  If you are maxed out on strength, then it doesn't make sense to start something completely different and try to go for more days in a row, ect...  If it isn't killing you by the end of the volume phase, then something is wrong.

    In the future, if you are finding this isn't enough, next cycle through do all sets 5x5, with the only pyramid being Friday squats to a max set. This is what I did, and worked great for me....Obviously looking at my sig, which was the result of the program.
  6. Aaron_F

    Aaron_F New Member

    [​IMG]5-->
    um, that is the only differentiation between the two. Short term vs long term fatigue. If we look at the chart, you can look at supercompensation from day, week or longer... so its just a matter of where you place your attention

    [​IMG]

    sounds like a plan, just keep track on how you feel. in terms of overall wellness/feelings of fatigue/joint pain/muscle pain etc. rather non-specific unfortunately.
    Otherwise you can just do something like pendlay, and drop the load a little nad work up again or alter exercises slightly nad work up.. lots of options :D
  7. Hypertrophier

    Hypertrophier New Member

    The badest thing that can happen, is a person with little knowledge of a topic. You can profit from a person who knows everything of a topic and you can profit from a person who knows nothing. But the person with little topic knowledge is the most dangerous one, because the output doesn´t match the input.

    What the hell does load and unload has to do with the single or dual factor theory? Why can´t a beginner play in the dual factor area? Pendlay and the others describe it very well, why can´t you understand what they say?

    The single factor theory deals with with the "destroy a muscle and wait a week", but the dual factor says, that you can train more than once a week. Why is the output of you (your posts) totally different from the input (the qoutes)? You should read and learn, and differ the whole information. I see no chance or need for me, to describe all the given information for you again.

    It´s all that, load and unload. At the single factor, the load is one workout, and the unload is the rest of the week. At the dual factor the load is some timeframe (individual), and the unload is another timeframe. If you can´t see what i mean, then do your homework. And by the way, read more from the others, especially the "inventors".
  8. Aaron_F

    Aaron_F New Member

    Now Bilbobeu,

    Why dont you show us where it says this about single factor.
    SPECIFICALLY where it says 'destroy a muscle and wait a week'?  (I guess you are using Matt Reynolds comments  - seeing as he used that exact terminology - about using Bodybuilding once per week as the idea of supercompensation = destroying the muscle, then ask yourself what matt means when he writes that "With Supercompensation, a day or two (up to a week) represents a period of rest." how does that fit that supercompensation = destroy and rest for a week..?  2 days to a week...)
    Bodybuilding generally does utilize a single factor approach (usually) but htey are modulating their volume to their desired frequency.   Even HST utilizes some of hte concepts of single factor, (protein synthesis raises and then drops by 48hrs - so time to reload) but you still end up with a higher frequency basically mathcing the lower end of matts range for supercompensation...
    but either way, Destroying a muscle is "loading" the muscle, and waiting a week is "unloading"
    so doing so is dual factor?  just loading and unloading...
    and where did I say begineers cant do it?
    why dont you provide something of substance instead of repeating the same garbage.  Surely its simple to do as its just load and unload.
    I would be happy to see where anyone says supercompensation is destroying a muscle and supercompensation is training once per week, but unfortunately its not.
  9. Hypertrophier

    Hypertrophier New Member

    Don´t know why you insult me with words nobody knows, but if that´s your style, it´s okay. Do you have any more swear-words in new zealand?

    And don´t hang up on some words or phrases that i use. And i am pretty sure, that i use words or phrases that you never read. In the internet, there isn´t much information. It´s obvious who´s just a bad quoter.


    Let´s start again.
    Do you know what a load is? Can you give us the definition of it? And can you give us some russian originator names, that found these adaptations or training models?
  10. Aaron_F

    Aaron_F New Member

    Whats the matter Bilbobeu, annoyed that people actually questioned you at bodyrecomposition.com?

    What information have you provided at all? oh thats right, your the avoiding everything

    Nice sidestep, why not awnser my questions first?
  11. Hypertrophier

    Hypertrophier New Member

    What the #### is your problem? If you call me again an bilbobeu then you can get the answers yourself. Don´t know what a bilbobeu is, but i don´t want to get insulted by you, just because you are a HST expert. Probably you are just that, a HST expert. Everything else is not known to ya.

    You don´t know the basics of loading, dual factor models or anything else. Ask and you will get questions, but don´t talk #### like you did the posts before. You got no idea behind the topic, you are just a bad quoter, so get your @$$ up and ask the guys that know more than you. And pendlay is just one of them, there are others. Or are the russians all taught by pendlay? Abadjev has learnt from pendlay? Definitely not! And here you get it back, you bilbobeu.
  12. Aaron_F

    Aaron_F New Member

    [​IMG]7-->
    Lets see two germans with the same condescending prose, both with exactly the same IP addy, both who have something for dual factor and both avoiding awnsering any questions.  And how the posting there suddendly stops and you start back here again? And your two different people?  
    Are you stupid?  where did I say that Pendlay taught Abadjev ?  
    He is only providing exampels of what can be done.  
    You seen to be the one caught up in the bodybuilding paradigm.  I have never said I know everything, but you seem to be the one with their head stuck up somewhere.
     
    Getting asked specific questions and ignoring them is the mark of a troll.
  13. NWlifter

    NWlifter Member

    Not to get in the middle of a brawl here.... [​IMG] But, what we really need to see (and it's not out there yet) is some science showing that one can accumulate a hypertrophic stimulus. Two factor works great for athletes who need more 'fitness' ie. conditioning, but no where is there any information showing one can 'build on' the hypertrophic stimulus and have it all come crashing on later during a deload/intensification/etc. time period. In fact, if you really read a lot on hypertrophy/protein turnover, it tends to fit a single factor model better since the MPS increases are so short after a workout.

    Ron
  14. Aaron_F

    Aaron_F New Member

    of course, but we are also on a strength forum, and strength is one component of 'fitness'.


    Hypertrophy appears to be the culmination of many small peaks in gene and protein synthesis, which builds up over time. With HST you are trying to keep ahead of the recovery wave, so you are constantly 'fatiguing' until you get to the SD period of unloading. But you dont get the same 'supercompensation' for doing this compared with dual factor training. Because as you become more trained, the level of protein synthesis wont be higher, it will be lower. Int he strength example, as you become more trained, strength should be higher (if your doing it right) than when you were less trained.

    There maybe some 'visual' supercompensation in the muscle due to changes in glycogen and water volume within the myocyte (ie glycogen depletion and loading to achieve glycogen supercompensation) but that is a seperate issue to the mechanical protein.
  15. NWlifter

    NWlifter Member

    that's where I'm not sure I see how that fits, I can see fitness helping the display of strength, but not building it...


    Right... but studies showing training too soon delays synthesis rather than expounding upon it. Nitrogen balance can go negative during too much accumulation, then once that phase is over, you still would only receive 'your' maximum upregulation for the 48-72 hour time period. Netting a loss...

    Hmm... I talked with Jules about this before and his thoughts, which seemed make sense, was that HST is banking on recovery between sessions.

    That's the theory, but that's where the science lacks unfortunately. There really isn't anything out there showing it's possible to build stimulus effects. Conversely, it seems to cause more catabolic effects.

    OK, I see where were differing on our outlook....
    Once a person has become familiar with movement patterns, hypertrophy is the main way of increasing strength. The best strength program yeild hypertrophy in the muscles needed, and the best hypertrophy program will show strength gains from that hypertrophy.

    Again, I can see the fitness gains for athletes, just doesn't really fit a hypertrophic/strength model.

Share This Page