HST and volume...

[Wildman]

As I continue to read through some of the logs and discussions about the number of exercises used in various peoples programs I have to wonder why so many are opting to use so few exercises. I setup my first HST cycle based upon the example routine fom the main site. It appears to be a solid set of 14 exercises. Typically two exercises for large muscle complexes and one exercise for the smaller single joint work. This seemed to be adequate to me considering it was a three times a week protocol.

Is it that many of you have tried the prescribed methods and found it to be too much volume or something else perhaps? Maybe just preference or time constraints are the culprit here.

I acknowledge that most of the complex lifts do also work my extermeties as well but I am not convinced totally that it is enough work. For example, my triceps are certainly not worked as hard in any pressing movement such as bench press or military press as they are in an isolation exercise such as lying tricep extensions. The same would go for my chest and shoulder muscles. The compound movements tend to split the load over all of the muscles involved and no one muscle is typically hit directly with the amount of load that it can truly handle alone. Another example perhaps. I can see that many of you have chosen to include military press or some other overhead press into the routine even though the anterior and medial heads of the deltoids are stimulated during the bench press. Is there a reason that the shoulder complex is given slightly more attention than any of the other muscles that are part of the chain in a bench press?

When I used to power lift we typically stayed with the big three lifts for the vast majority of our work. It was very common though to do isolation work for the triceps, chest, deltoids, hip flexors, back extensors etc. The isolation work seemed to me to be a tremendously important part of the training. Certainly the strength and neural skills gained from these isolation lifts carried over into our big three lifts. I know that I was able to increase my bench over the 400 mark by incorporating lying tricep extensions and close grip bench press once I stalled on my progress in the high 300s. I would expect the same results to be true in HST.

So what do you guys say?

 

[beingisbeing]

I think it really depends!

I was doing high volume wide variety of exercises

I'm personally sick of this approach

It mentally wears me out, jumping from exercise to exercise

I feel like it contributes to CNS burnout as well (or the volume does anyway)

But keep in mind:

1) I'm a relative newb and pretty weak
2) I've been cutting this entire time (with breaks of course)
3) My arms hardly lag. It may be genetic, but my bis and tris outpace my body naturally it seems
4) Its the large groups (rhomboids, chest) that lag on my body. Part of the problem, I suspect, is doing too many exercises and isos, for me.

So when I start bulking (soon), I'm going to go with a greatly reduced number of exercises, lower sets. I'll keep you posted.


Keep in mind that Bryan says he's a big fan of reducing exercises to 6-7 with higher sets per exercise. This is somewhere in the FAQ's I think.


The ultimate test is how you respond. Being an experienced power lifter, if you don't respond to lower volume, compound based work (in your auxiliary muscles especially) then the solution is obvious!

But again if you're new to HST, you might be surprised at the growth response you get with 'less is more.'

It can be magical!

 

[mikeynov]

<div>
(Wildman @ Aug. 22 2008,10:50)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">As I continue to read through some of the logs and discussions about the number of exercises used in various peoples programs I have to wonder why so many are opting to use so few exercises. I setup my first HST cycle based upon the example routine fom the main site. It appears to be a solid set of 14 exercises. Typically two exercises for large muscle complexes and one exercise for the smaller single joint work. This seemed to be adequate to me considering it was a three times a week protocol.

Is it that many of you have tried the prescribed methods and found it to be too much volume or something else perhaps? Maybe just preference or time constraints are the culprit here.

I acknowledge that most of the complex lifts do also work my extermeties as well but I am not convinced totally that it is enough work. For example, my triceps are certainly not worked as hard in any pressing movement such as bench press or military press as they are in an isolation exercise such as lying tricep extensions. The same would go for my chest and shoulder muscles. The compound movements tend to split the load over all of the muscles involved and no one muscle is typically hit directly with the amount of load that it can truly handle alone. Another example perhaps. I can see that many of you have chosen to include military press or some other overhead press into the routine even though the anterior and medial heads of the deltoids are stimulated during the bench press. Is there a reason that the shoulder complex is given slightly more attention than any of the other muscles that are part of the chain in a bench press?

When I used to power lift we typically stayed with the big three lifts for the vast majority of our work. It was very common though to do isolation work for the triceps, chest, deltoids, hip flexors, back extensors etc. The isolation work seemed to me to be a tremendously important part of the training. Certainly the strength and neural skills gained from these isolation lifts carried over into our big three lifts. I know that I was able to increase my bench over the 400 mark by incorporating lying tricep extensions and close grip bench press once I stalled on my progress in the high 300s. I would expect the same results to be true in HST.

So what do you guys say?</div>
I'd say you're definitely right that results will probably be optimized by including the accessory work, yes.

The key, obviously, is to be able to recover from it. People forget that this is a trainable quality, though, i.e. building up your capacity to tolerate an increase in exercise volume is something that can not only be done, but will almost certainly aid one's strength/muscular progression.

 

[Wildman]

<div>
(beingisbeing @ Aug. 22 2008,11:43)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I think it really depends!

I was doing high volume wide variety of exercises

I'm personally sick of this approach

It mentally wears me out, jumping from exercise to exercise

I feel like it contributes to CNS burnout as well (or the volume does anyway)

But keep in mind:

1) I'm a relative newb and pretty weak
2) I've been cutting this entire time (with breaks of course)
3) My arms hardly lag. It may be genetic, but my bis and tris outpace my body naturally it seems
4) Its the large groups (rhomboids, chest) that lag on my body. Part of the problem, I suspect, is doing too many exercises and isos, for me.

So when I start bulking (soon), I'm going to go with a greatly reduced number of exercises, lower sets. I'll keep you posted.

               
Keep in mind that Bryan says he's a big fan of reducing exercises to 6-7 with higher sets per exercise. This is somewhere in the FAQ's I think.


The ultimate test is how you respond. Being an experienced power lifter, if you don't respond to lower volume, compound based work (in your auxiliary muscles especially) then the solution is obvious!

But again if you're new to HST, you might be surprised at the growth response you get with 'less is more.'

It can be magical!</div>
Those are good point beingisbeing. I appreciate the feedback. I just found it so curious to see so many using an abbreviated program to what is posted as the example workout on the main pages. Perhaps Bryan would be so kind as to post up some alternate routines and maybe note when those are more appropriate to use? I like the thought of Simplify and Win as long as good progression can be made and symmetry is maintained. I can see me now adding some size to my torso through HST and have my arms atrophy down so I look like some bloated bodied alien or something. Heh

I agree with you whole heartedly about the high volume approach. Although I did see results, I was riding the razors edge on fatigue for most of the time. I had to be very careful not to overtrain and recognize the signs early on. My partner was not so lucky. He has only trained a few years now and just over a year with me. He got overtrained and we had to let him take off an extended period of time to recover.

Good luck with the bulk. Im an old dirty bulker kind of guy and my advise will admittently be lax for a fella looking to bulk but not gain the fat. We never cared much about the fat as long as the plates kept adding up on the bar. I am trying to change my old habits some now and see if I can make progress with a greatly reduced calorie diet.

 

[Wildman]

<div>
(mikeynov @ Aug. 22 2008,1:58)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I'd say you're definitely right that results will probably be optimized by including the accessory work, yes.

The key, obviously, is to be able to recover from it.  People forget that this is a trainable quality, though, i.e. building up your capacity to tolerate an increase in exercise volume is something that can not only be done, but will almost certainly aid one's strength/muscular progression.</div>
Agreed and thank you. I know that my tolerance for volume has skyrocketed over the last year or so on the volume / failure training I have been doing. So the generic HST routine that is posted on the main page didnt look like that much work to me honestly. Had I been coming off of a 5x5, well maybe it would have been a little daunting but I use isolations in my 5x5 as well. I just A / B the isolation work so that the smaller muscles are isolated in an alternating fashion. I perform the isolation work in a 3x8 scheme and simply use progression over the course of the 5x5 starting at about 60% of my 8 rep max and slowly add to the weight to hit my PR in the sixth week. From then on its add as you get all 3 sets of 8. I had very good luck with this btw and will continue to practice this approach once I am ready for a change of pace again.

 

[imported_electric]

This is a very though question and there is an old thread in this forum (around 2005) that I was reading the other day and it addresses this fantastically. Basically it says that the first priority are big compound movements. They work many muscles, stabilizing muscles, core... and are much more applicable to real life situations. Since they work so many muscles they have a good cost benefit considering time spent in the gym and muscle gain and they also tend to lend themselves to symmetry since they drag all the worked muscles along.
If you want/have to do isolations they are second priority and only make sense if you choose specific isolation exercises that use a greater stretch that does not happen with the compound. For example bench presses are great for triceps development, specially if you do them close gripped. But if you must do an isolation choose skullcrusher or overhead extension using a maximum ROM to emphasize stretch.

 

[adb1x1]

Keep in mind that an example is not necessarily a 'recipe'.

For example, chins and rows are listed in the example routine, but that doesn't mean you can't alternate between them. That is, do chins one workout and rows the next.

Also, different grip widths are mentioned, but that doesn't mean to do a set with a wide grip, then one with a narrow grip, etc, just program in the variations from cycle to cycle.

3 exercises are listed for shoulders, and there may be people who need work on a specific area of the shoulders, and therefore require more exercises for that area. But I have found that heavy, overhead presses work the entire muscle group pretty well (plus a lot of indirect work from other compound exercises).

Basically it boils down to the most efficient exercises for all muscle groups: Big, compound movements, with specialization where necessary.

I suspect considerably less specialization is required than most people think. I see a lot of starting BB'ers peering into the mirror with dumbbells in hand, trying to work some tiny muscle to the exclusion of others. It's a bit humorous, since they would work that one and several others doing a good, heavy, compound movement.

Too many exercises will just wear you out.

 

[scientific muscle]

<div>
(adb1x1 @ Aug. 22 2008,4:57)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Keep in mind that an example is not necessarily a 'recipe'.

For example, chins and rows are listed in the example routine, but that doesn't mean you can't alternate between them. That is, do chins one workout and rows the next.

Also, different grip widths are mentioned, but that doesn't mean to do a set with a wide grip, then one with a narrow grip, etc, just program in the variations from cycle to cycle.

3 exercises are listed for shoulders, and there may be people who need work on a specific area of the shoulders, and therefore require more exercises for that area. But I have found that heavy, overhead presses work the entire muscle group pretty well (plus a lot of indirect work from other compound exercises).

Basically it boils down to the most efficient exercises for all muscle groups: Big, compound movements, with specialization where necessary.

I suspect considerably less specialization is required than most people think. I see a lot of starting BB'ers peering into the mirror with dumbbells in hand, trying to work some tiny muscle to the exclusion of others. It's a bit humorous, since they would work that one and several others doing a good, heavy, compound movement.

Too many exercises will just wear you out.</div>
Good points. Different people have different physiques and goals. I only do 5 exercises currently and my whole body is shot except my calves. I may add some more iso's down the road....for legs and maybe some arm work. But almost my entire musculature is well stimulated doing only 5-6 compounds per session.