Extending Sci's Sample

_tim

_tim

Well-Known Member
Hello, People.

I've been following the Sample that Sci put out a couple weeks back with a dual-factor model as his base. I'm just getting going with this and am setting up my next cycle, to begin next week. Essentially, this is what I'm thinking about:

Week 1: 3 x 10 reps from 75% to 85% (10 RM)
Week 2: 3 x 10 reps from 90% to 100% (10 RM)
Week 3: 3 x 5 reps from 75% to 85% (5 RM)
Week 4: 3 x 5 reps from 90% to 100% (5 RM)
Week 5: 3 x 5 reps from 101% to 103% (5 RM) - small but steady increments upward in weight above my 5 RM
Week 6: 3 x 3 reps from 90% to 100% (3 RM)
BONUS - if I can take it:
mad.gif

Week 7: 3 x 3 reps from 101% to 103% (3 RM) - same deal as above
Week 8: 3 x 3 reps from 104% to 106% (3 RM)
Week 9: 3 x 3 reps from 107% to 110% (3 RM)

SD!

The 3 sets will be broken into a 2 + 1 (ex: 2 sets stiff legged deads, 1 set front squats) type arrangement in most cases by muscle group. I'm still working those specifics out in terms of what exercises I'm gonna focus on.

My thought is that if at any point in the "Bonus" weeks I'm dead
ghostface.gif
, I'd stop the cycle there and begin my SD.

I know Sci mentioned that something he'd read suggested a dual-factor model was superior. I'm not going to argue against that in any way - this is just a hypothesis that I'd like to try for me and see where it leads. I'd love to know what you guys out there think. I'll create a new training log to track my progress starting next week.

Thanks for reading my extended and rather long-winded post!

Have a great holiday, everyone!
Tim
 
Standard three days per week, or reduced due to loads?  My question is why are you dropping your volume in half at week three?  It is not uncommon to drop volume, but most of the time I don't see anything less than 20 reps for a hypertrophy routine.  It is true that Mikeynov's dual factor model went through a 1x10 phase and eventually dropped to very low volume at the end, but he stuck with higher reps longer and the transitions were smoother: 3x10, 2x10, then 1x10, then BACK UP to 5x5.
 
<div>
(Ruthenian @ May 25 2007,14:17)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Standard three days per week, or reduced due to loads? My question is why are you dropping your volume in half at week three?</div>
I'm planning on keeping with the standard 3 days per week. To your comment about volume - I'm focusing a whole lot less on volume as opposed to load with this. I realized that I've never really challenged myself with a load-focused approach and truly want to give it a try using an HST methodology as my guide (periodized, progressive load). I could be wrong, but I believe that this was similar to Sci's approach - that maintaining volume quite possibly shouldn't carry the same emphasis of the load progression.

If I'm wrong about that, I truly apologize - but I still feel as though this approach maintains the core principle of HST (at least as I understand it) and is worth a shot.
 
I like it. The first 4 weeks look almost like straight vanilla HST without the 15's at the beginning. Then everything after that takes you to the beyondddddd. Weight percentage wise, your cycle will end up a lot like mine is headed towards... doing 110% of your 3RM is probably close to 100% of your 1RM. At the end of my cycle, I &quot;plan&quot; on doind 10 cluster reps of my original 1RM.
 
I like it. I don't think I'd make it out to your week NINE, but hey....
You will probably have to watch the fat gains on this one near the second half unless you're also doing cardio or something to burn it. 3x5's will lend to some serious strength gains early in the program, but we'd like to see how you make lean mass with it.
 
Dual-factor means the the fatigue and the performance are the two factors involved.  In phase 1 of any dual-factor model you have high volume, fatigueing workouts.  Then in phase 2 the volume is dropped allowing increased recovery and performnace so the load is able to increase while the volume and/or frequency decreases.

What is the third factor?  You are just playing with numbers which is cool, but tri-factor is a nonsense term in this case.
 
your model is just another way to do HST with increasing loads and decreasing volume. So it is typically HST, even as Bryan laid it out originally.
Alot of people noticed the dual-factor model in vanilla HST, and your proposed idea has it also.

The other school of thought is headed by Dan Moore and suggests keeping total reps constant throughout an HST cycle.
 
<div>
(scientific muscle @ May 25 2007,18:13)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">What is the third factor?  You are just playing with numbers which is cool, but tri-factor is a nonsense term in this case.</div>
I'm really sorry, Sci.  I thought each &quot;factor&quot; tied to weight/rep combinations and the metabolic reaction induced by the volume/weight combinations.  In that sense, my &quot;third factor&quot; was simply surpassing the 100% RM for an extended period with lesser volume.  Sorry I missed the boat on that.
 
<div>
(quadancer @ May 25 2007,17:47)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">3x5's will lend to some serious strength gains early in the program, but we'd like to see how you make lean mass with it.</div>
This is an excellent point - and honestly one that I'm very interested in myself. I think this point alone is worth keeping up a decent log for.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">If I'm wrong about that, I truly apologize </div>
Nothing to apologize for, just curious.  It seemed like a rather dramatic drop early on, but lets just see how it goes.  Just about everybody here tweaks the program around within the basic parameters -- its one way to learn what works best for you.
 
2 questions
1) Is 2 sets for each muslce, like on sci cycle, its enough volume to get lean mass?
2) Why skipping the 15's?
Thnx
 
1) 2 sets may or may not be enough for each particular individual.

2) The 15s are primarily metabolic and are too light to induce much hypertrophy for some people. They are considered optional. If you like the 15s, keep a week or two for them.
 
Sci, is 2 sets for each muscle is enough for you to have hypertrophy? especially on the 5' when you have only 10 reps.
BTW, on the 15's i see more hypertrophy than on the 5's. So ill keep on doing the 15's.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I don't do 15s. </div>

That statement makes me think
laugh.gif
I am in the middle of 15's and cannot help but hate the damn things but I find them necessary, go figure
rock.gif
 
<div>
(scientific muscle @ May 28 2007,02:27)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">For HST I prefer 3 sets.

3x10=30 reps during the 10s loads.
3x5=15 reps during the 5s loads.

I don't do 15s.</div>
This is how I did it for about 1 year at first...then I started keeping reps constant...I think Sci is right by recommending the Zig Zag ...just like Bryan originally did!
 
<div>
(Joe.Muscle @ May 29 2007,08:57)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(scientific muscle @ May 28 2007,02:27)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">For HST I prefer 3 sets.

3x10=30 reps during the 10s loads.
3x5=15 reps during the 5s loads.

I don't do 15s.</div>
This is how I did it for about 1 year at first...then I started keeping reps constant...I think Sci is right by recommending the Zig Zag ...just like Bryan originally did!</div>
What is your rep range?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top