Frequency 2x Per Week Vs 3x And Question About Muscle Hyperplasia

Discussion in 'Hypertrophy-Specific Training (HST)' started by UCS1932, Aug 18, 2018.

  1. UCS1932

    UCS1932 New Member

    Hello Everyone,

    I’ve read on this from people and possibly Bryan that training a muscle group twice per week is just a good as training a muscle group three times per week, or at least nearly as good. I think HST ROCKS!! It is backed by total science and my own results.

    With that said, if training twice per week is nearly as good, would training each muscle group twice per week with higher volume (3 sets per exercise) be more effective or equally effective as as HST three times per week with no two-a-days? I’m stressed for time and can’t train twice per day. I’ve devised a 4 day split that works each muscle group twice per week using 7 exercises per workout with 3 sets per exercise.

    I devised this exercise routine as a way to increase strength with the higher volume as HST at one set per exercise doesn’t seem to increase my strength all that well. I do 15 exercises each workout so adding another set isn’t feasible.

    Also, Bryan had said that muscle damage/micro trauma is highly correlated with muscle hyperplasia. So wouldn’t a workout that trained each muscle group twice per week with more volume be more effective than HST at stimulating muscle hyperplasia, since it causes more micro trauma? Also how would HST twice per day compare to this split routine?
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2018
  2. Old and Grey

    Old and Grey Super Moderator Staff Member

    Frequency and keeping your muscles in protein synthesis is your friend. However, you cannot do more than your time allows.
  3. Bryan Haycock

    Bryan Haycock Administrator Staff Member

    The frequency with which you train is more dependent on how well your joints can sustain the constant work load. Training a muscle three times per week seems to work best for most.

    Hyperplasia will not be effected by training frequency. Additionally, hyperplasia will not meaningfully contribute you overall muscle size because it happens only to a limited extent. Most bodybuilders (large) do not have significantly more or different number of muscle fibers than individuals who do not lift weights.
    _Simon_ likes this.
  4. _Simon_

    _Simon_ Active Member

    Makes sense, and yeah I'm not convinced one should be chasing hyperplasia (if it's even feasible, I know Ben Pakulski has claimed his extreme loaded stretch protocols will bring about hyperplasia).. to me it seems something that occurs under great great extreme stress to the muscle for that to occur... and to what extent could you meaningfully extend that to? Sounds risky to me hehe
  5. NWlifter

    NWlifter Active Member

    2x vs 3x a week... for some, it might be better, for some the same, for some worse. Like Bryan said, basically you have to factor in the 'whole' person in that equation. On a muscle itself basis, more frequency theoretically is always better, but in a 'whole person', if 3x pushes recovery too far, it might end up the same or worse than 2x per week. I'd guess for most, the differences will be small enough you probably wouldn't 'see' the difference over the course of a few months.
    _Simon_ likes this.
  6. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    Given the anecdotal data available, I’d be amazed if there is anyone who has access to enough food and sleep(and at rest periods) that can’t adequately recover from 3x a week training of a muscle.

    I mean, it’s not as though our recent ancestors and the option of taking a day off. Just wouldn’t make sense to me, logically, unless the programming is at fault - i.e. the fault would be with the methodology of test.
  7. NWlifter

    NWlifter Active Member

    food and sleep seem to have zip to do with my recovery issues. I've always been this way, I can eat enough to get fat even... and sleep well.... and yet too much training still gives me really bad symptoms (almost flu like). (If training hard enough at higher frequency or higher volume) Unless those higher frequency workouts are VERY minimal and gentle.
    If we think of ancestors, and survival of the fittest, people like me would be non-survivors back in those days. ;)
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2018
    _Simon_ and Jester like this.
  8. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    NWlifter likes this.
  9. NWlifter

    NWlifter Active Member

    ? Not sure what that green smile means? :)
    Is it 'LOL at me not surviving? :)

    (what sucks, is if I really dig in and 'do more' I gain like crazy then I burn out, if I could recover doing 'more', man... ..
    I suppose programming, like you mentioned, could be 'never just right'...)
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2018
  10. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    Smiles for the irony of outliers ... we all have that thing that 95% can do as intended that is just ballsed up for us.
    NWlifter likes this.
  11. Totentanz

    Totentanz Super Moderator Staff Member

    I knew a guy with the same issue - flu/cold symptoms when he lifts too much. His doctor ended up diagnosing him with exercise-induced asthma. I'm assuming that's valid for his case, but I don't know, I'm not a doctor.

    I have the opposite problem. If I don't work out enough, my body seems to start falling apart.
    Jester likes this.
  12. NWlifter

    NWlifter Active Member

    I didn't get respiratory type symptoms, just that super dead 'don't feel good' feelings like you have when your recovering from the flu, where you feel really dead and just want to sit on the couch with like a blanket and eat soup :)

    I have that too though now that I'm older, if I don't work out, then my old injuries actually get more finicky and I feel less energetic. Too little bad, too much bad, narrow window of 'good' amount.
  13. Old and Grey

    Old and Grey Super Moderator Staff Member

    Me too. The older you get, the more noticeable it is.
  14. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    ‘Use it or lose it’ is the cliche for a reason, right...?
  15. NWlifter

    NWlifter Active Member

    Size, stamina, flexibility, fitness, ROM, strength, insulin sensitivity, glycogen stores... etc etc.
  16. Sci

    Sci Well-Known Member

    For me personally, my best results seem to come from low volume, high frequency. Wether Arthur Jones style 1 really hard set 3x/week or HST style 3x/week progressive tension.
    Jester and NWlifter like this.
  17. NWlifter

    NWlifter Active Member

    Just noticed I forget to comment on this... what do you mean Arthur Jones style? (like 3x full body in a 'train hard' kinda way?) but without HST increments?

    It leads me to think of something I've always wondered...
    choice A vs choice B

    choice A
    1x a week per lift
    1st 100x8
    7th 110x8
    14th 120x8
    21st 130x8


    choice B
    3x a week same progression
    1st 100x8
    3rd 103x8
    5th 107x8
    7th 110x8
    9th 112x8
    11th 115x8
    14th 120x8
    16th 123x8
    18th 126x8
    21st 130x8

    any difference in hypertrophy? I wonder if the 'in between' progression does anything?
    Last edited: Oct 14, 2018
  18. _Simon_

    _Simon_ Active Member

    Interesting!! I'm inclined to say the 3 day a week.... but I couldn't tell you why. Seems like nutrients would be more inclined to partition more towards rebuild and repair with the more frequent and same progression... but I couldn't say why haha. Just makes sense logically... keen to hear what others say
  19. Old and Grey

    Old and Grey Super Moderator Staff Member

    Simply put, more continued muscle protein synthesis in choice B means more muscle growth even if you changed your example to the original Bro-style of lifting and did 3 sets in choice A per workout. Approximate same monthly volume but different results.
    NWlifter likes this.
  20. NWlifter

    NWlifter Active Member

    I guess what I wonder though, is studies show higher frequency attenuates PS, and other studies show higher frequency is only a teeny bit better most of the time, so close some call it 'close enough', I wonder if it's 3x of small bumps vs 1x of a big bump....
    (the tissue condition thing.... longer between sessions lowers RBE kinda like an SD, so when you workout, it's more significant, if you train more often, RBE rises so each session is a smaller stimulus, so you get three times a week 3x2=6 or or two times a week 2x 2.9 =5.8 or one session a week 1x5=5)
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2018

Share This Page