HIGH VOLUME/multiple sets

I think Sci, is right.

No one said 20 reps is magical neither 30 or 40.

The principals stays the same for HST.

And really you can make it even more simple if you want to by saying this:

To get big.....LIFT heavy sh-it often.

First lift heavy sh-it often.
Second lift heavy sh-it more and more if it doesn't interfere with often (frequency)
Third lifty even heavier and well if you can't go take a 2 week nap and come back and start lifting heavy sh-it again.

Clear as mud?? hehe
laugh.gif
biggrin.gif
 
But all joking aside.

I think what Sci has expierenced is a period of OVEREACHING. He has lifted heavy for a while at a certain work capacity or rep range and now he has lowered the weigth a little and has done more work. Something his body was not use to so it b/c anabolic again.

I think if any of us take what we have been doing for the past month or two and then do the opposite you will have great results (to a degree).

For me I have been averaging around 120 reps per week for large muscle or in other words 40 rep hst sets.

However the guys here at the forum talked me into increasing weight even more and just doing 20 reps. What happend was I got bigger and stronger quicker.

Now does that mean 20 reps is the holy grail?
rock.gif
Im guessing probabley not. I think that most likely after around another 3 weeks or so at 20 reps if I bump up my reps again I will see great results.

I am not sure but I am thinking it will change my work load and my body will respond.

Does this make any sense?
 
<div>
(Joe.Muscle @ Mar. 03 2007,13:30)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Something his body was not use to so it b/c anabolic again.



I am not sure but I am thinking it will change my work load and my body will respond.</div>
I never made reference to a specific rep range as being the holy grail, I was referring to the first post as a whole.  When someone completely mixes up their routine, then makes gains, they get exited and tell the world its the best thing since sliced bread, they go stale in a few months, either go back to what they were doing before or come up with something new.  You cant use the excuse, but maybe he found his rep/set scheme that works for him, as I would almost guarantee, he goes stale in a few months.

As far as what you said (in quotes) that echoes what Im saying.  Yet if you believe the HST priciples and follow them, thats not supposed to happen.  Is it not possible you/he has developed the dreaded RBE and coulda prevented a dramatic routine change by simply resting longer? As I think a while back when I suggested people might wish to change routines often, it was suggested that its best to stick to what your doing, rest/eat more as needed, and keep on trucking.
smile.gif
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Really ANY program which follows the principles WILL work. Which is why guys are seeing great results on HST, Max-stim, Madcow's 5x5, Waterbury, Lyle Mcdonald's routine, etc. etc. </div>
Exactly. In fact, 5x5 looks a lot like a variation of HST based on the 5's. But the principles are still there. Max-Stim follows the same principles too, putting an emphasis on constant volume and fatigue management. Nobody here claims that he has found the perfect routine, and experimenting a bit with other variables while staying true to the underlying principles is not a bad thing, either. Especially for seasoned lifters who want to change up things a bit.

No need to get confused, as long as you are able to see beyond the reps, sets and exercises that a particular program calls for. After all, like many others here have said, HST is really a set of principles. The &quot;vanilla HST&quot; program is just a way of applying those principles to your training.

Regards,
Dimitris
 
'''think it does, though. At the beginning of each 2-week block you generally have a couple of easy workouts before reaching your max again.

Bryan's said a couple of times that zig-zagging isn't a bad thing in HST, and that it helps recover from any minor injuries. ''

Still isnt Dual Factor.
 
You two are missing the point.

The HST priciples suggest that if followed, you can gain using submax weight.  At no point does it suggest altering your sets/reps, if anything, its suggested they are for the most part insignificant.  If you follow the &quot;principles&quot;, according to HST RBE will be avoided, all RBE means, is your no longer stimulated by the movements/weights your doing, so I have to wonder, those that jump programs, be it within HST principles or otherwise, I wonder if they could have remained on the HST program they were doing, just increased the SD period, VS adding volume (multiple sets/reps)?  

Take a deep breathe, over look my comment that I was confused, as it was more of an expression than truth.  
biggrin.gif
 
Bump this post...Mikeynov how is your high-volume routine doing?
I am thinking of starting an HST cycle after I recover this week form my lower back strain.  My experience with Korte's high-volume has me wanting to maximize volume this cycle, without overtraining.

I haven't decided yet exactly what volume to do...
I was thinking 30 reps per exercise, but then it also depends on wether or not I alternate exercises.

The 50 rep total is interesting, but to do it I would have to limit each workout to three exercises. Another alternative is to shoot for a 25 rep total and do 2 exercises per bodypart, which would end up being 50 reps/major bodypart.

<u>Example- 50 reps/ exercise total volume- 3 exercises/session
</u>Deadlift alternated with squat
Chinup alternated with BB Row
Dips alternated with Bench Press
 
Im not Mickey...but I do remember him saying before his best HST cycle was a high volume routine.

Sci...I like your 50 rep cycle to!
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">To get big.....LIFT heavy sh-it often.

First lift heavy sh-it often.

Second lift heavy sh-it more and more if it doesn't interfere with often (frequency)
Third lifty even heavier and well if you can't go take a 2 week nap and come back and start lifting heavy sh-it again.

Clear as mud?? hehe</div>

Well, since you did the bumpety-bump on this thread, I'll chime in. What you just stated above is pretty much my philosophy, with the exception of increasing frequency. I find as I lift heavier &amp; heavier, my frequency needs to decrease, but that's just me. I sort of let my body dictate when it's ready to take another beating. If I'm still sore, i wait another day or two. No biggie.

....but I'm training for strength &amp; trying to stay lean, not training for hypertrophy.

I think increased volume is crucial on a pure hypertrophy program.
 
Am I the only guy here who is seeing two completely different camps on this matter?

&quot;High Volume&quot;
&quot;Simplify and Win&quot;

You may all be correct though. I'm still believing that something works for a while, then you need something else when it stalls out.
 
I think High volume may be the way to go...but I dont think its pratical for most of us.

For example I hit the gym today...after a 12 hour work day...I just dont feel like laying down and busting out 40 to 50 reps...and If I try to do it...my workout sucks and its not fun.

25 to 30 reps are better for me I think...I wish I could do 40 reps...but when I do that routine...I get burned out and I dont like lifting.

On 20 reps I feel great...but I prefer a little higher..for me thats sweet spot seems to be 30 reps....

I guess If I had all the time in the world .....like back in my college days 50 reps a day would be great...but this old (young) dog...just don't have the energy!
biggrin.gif
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Apr. 11 2007,20:25)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Am I the only guy here who is seeing two completely different camps on this matter?

&quot;High Volume&quot;
&quot;Simplify and Win&quot;

You may all be correct though. I'm still believing that something works for a while, then you need something else when it stalls out.</div>
No, quadancer, not two schools of thought. I am 100% in agreement with 'simplify and win', which is simply the idea of doing ONLY a few basic, compound free-weight lifts and working your whole body that way instead of doing 12 different exercises and complicting everything.

Fausto himself (HST expert and Author of the &quot;SIMPLIFY AND WIN&quot; thread), advocates doing high volume/multiple sets in his simplified routine. I think he started out clustering to 30 reps, and now does 25 total. My workout routine is almost identical to Fausto's and we have the same ideas about training philosophy.

This thread is simply my confirmation that higher volume/multiple sets really is more effective in my experience. I don't think doing one set per exercise is going to do that much unless you do multiple exercises per bodypart like Old &amp; Gray does.

'Simplify &amp; Win' goes well with high volume, because doing only 4-5 exercises for the whole body leaves plenty of room to do multiple sets for those exercises.
smile.gif
 
So in order to perform more volume, you would need to lower the weight correct?


Debating wether to go for 25 reps or 30..hmmm. All this talk about reps makes me want to go back to the gym for more!

or perhaps perform my whole HST cycle with a linear periodization, to make my body have to constantly adapt:

15's 25(clustered)-30
10's-20 reps
5's-15 reps
 
Sci...

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Fausto himself (HST expert and Author of the &quot;SIMPLIFY AND WIN&quot; thread), advocates doing high volume/multiple sets in his simplified routine. I think he started out clustering to 30 reps, and now does 25 total. My workout routine is almost identical to Fausto's and we have the same ideas about training philosophy.</div>

Sincerely, I tried 1 set for too long a time, until I realised it does not work, thus the higher volume. It may work only for newbies (to working out not to HST) for a short while, and then after that the volume must be jacked up.

Also I believe it is in line with the summation effect and how it affects the anabolic environment within the muscle cells.

To quote Bryan just a little <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Ok, here are a few points to think about.

1) Increasing volume isn't a bad thing. The only time it is contraindicated is when you can't handle any more volume because the current weight loads are sufficiently heavy and are causing sufficient trauma to the tissues with minimal volume and adequate frequency.

There is a false notion that HST is about “low volume”. This notion arose from people erroneously stereotyping HST as a previously existing “muscle beach” method used by guys in “the good old’ days”.

HST prescribes that volume be more evenly distributed over time to create a more constant environment and thus and more consistent stimulus for muscle growth.

The volume of training in HST does not differ significantly from previous programs.

2) The only physiological benefit to training twice per day is to increase the amount of loading the muscle is getting. So, if I were to go from once per day training to twice per day training, and not increase the volume, I would not be deriving any particular anabolic benefit from splitting up my workouts into two shorter sessions.

You may however benefit from doing this in other ways such as accommodating a tight schedule or getting the most out of limited energy levels.

3) It is ok to either repeat the previous workout, or to use a different group of exercises, as long as the second set of exercises is comparable in effectiveness to the first group.

In other words, you can have Workout A and Workout B and simply alternate between them, using workout A in the morning and Workout B in the evening or vice versa.

Different exercises for the same muscle group usually only differ in the number of muscle groups involved, and the degree of stretch experienced by each muscle group during the movement.

In the end, when things get really heavy, all primary movers will be activated 100% regardless of the stance, or foot placement, or hand position, etc.

So for example, wide stance squats will hit just as much muscle as shoulder width squats. All that differs is the amount of stretch involved for the inner thigh (adductors).</div>

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">This thread is simply my confirmation that higher volume/multiple sets really is more effective in my experience.</div>

As stated above, with the exception of 2x day training (this is just another way of increasing training volume), it is the way to go if you are conditioned enough so as to get enough stimulus for growth!
wink.gif


<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I don't think doing one set per exercise is going to do that much unless you do multiple exercises per bodypart like Old &amp; Gray does.</div>

Exactly, and whilst that is OK, it becomes cumbersome unless you have a very nicely equiped gym, so as to avoid loosing time during set up.

Still, it is easier, and more effective to use rather big compounds during the heavy bouts to get the effective stimulus, mixing this with a volume btween 15 and 30 reps for each, whether clustered or straight depending on individual endurance.

So...at the end of the day, a little pump caused by enough volume is a good thing.
wink.gif


Just my ramble
cool.gif
 
Okay, I see what we're comparing here. I've never done 1 set for anything, ever, so I thought 2-3 sets WAS low volume.
It's been a while since I read the 'simplify and win' thread. Missed that part about volume.
 
Just for my clarification on everyones opinion what do you guy consider high volume per muscle group?

Im guessing if I am reading the thread correctly 30 reps is high volume per muscle group.

So simply and win routine would be for example

Bench
Row
Squat
Press all for 30 reps and 120 reps total...with the opportunity for iso if need be correct?
 
<div>
(Joe.Muscle @ Mar. 03 2007,13:30)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">But all joking aside.

I think what Sci has expierenced is a period of OVEREACHING. He has lifted heavy for a while at a certain work capacity or rep range and now he has lowered the weigth a little and has done more work. Something his body was not use to so it b/c anabolic again.

I think if any of us take what we have been doing for the past month or two and then do the opposite you will have great results (to a degree).


I am not sure but I am thinking it will change my work load and my body will respond.

Does this make any sense?</div>
i agree with this,mainly because i recently went back to a standard split but kept the rep shceme and progressive load principles of hst,and its been great, the body needs a change.

the body always adapts even with a program like hst,so switching is a good idea from time to time.breaks the manotony,gives rise to experimentation and further progress.
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Just for my clarification on everyones opinion what do you guy consider high volume per muscle group?</div>

Here's how i approach this very question...if I can't do more weight/reps each and every time I hit the gym, my volume is too high and/or I need a few days off, a/k/a I need more recovery. This is the general rule that I live by....and I apply that thinking to body parts, not exercises.

Here's an example. Last time at the gym, I did legs. I knew I wasn't going to beat my pb of 350 on squats, nor did I think I had it in me that particular day to do 350 for two reps....so.....I made a conscious decision that I was going to hit a new high in weights on the stiff legged deadlifts, and possibly try for a new rep high on leg extensions. In addition, I threw 365 on my back and just did a few partials. Basically, I did anything I could to convince my body &amp; brain that &quot;things are not status quo around here&quot;.

One of the problems that plagued me for years was being stuck in a weight/rep range on all my lifts. Sure, I would change routines as often as I changed my underwear, but all that did was change the most superficial elements of my programs. I wasn't lifting heavier weights, I wasn't completing more reps, and, not surprisingly, I was not making gains in strength or size.

I think at times we all get cought up in the hysteria of trying to develop the perfect plan, rather than just focussing on the basics. If you want to get bigger, you need to eat more &amp; lift heavier. No one complicated this simple fact more than I did, and for years I had no progress. I took a very simple concept and made it overly complicated, and it was very much to my own detriment.

IMHO, it's imperative that progress be constant, from workout to workout. Sure, not every workout will be or can be a PB bonanza, but this is the mental approach that is needed to make gains, especially for the natural lifter.

If you're doing more weight and/or reps on *almost* every workout, in the most general sense, then that's the right rep range. Assuming proper diet, you will grow by doing this.
smile.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top