if bryan could re-write hst in 2014 what would he change?

Layne's theory on "metabolic damage" is the most complete pile of garbage I've ever heard. It only applies to wealthy white women who don't/can't track calories accurately, and sadly, is not saving the hundreds of millions of starving kids across Africa, India and China.

But hey ... it's worth getting into a fight with the entire Internet about ...
 
Bryan Haycock said:
I would increase the emphasis of drop sets during the lower rep blocks. I would also emphasize taking your time during the early 15 rep sets and really trying to get as much out of each set regardless of the weight load.

Its very hard to put out advice that 90% of people can just take and apply. As we know, the right number of reps and sets on any given day is a bit of a moving target. As mentioned above, I do think you need to hit 30 reps for upper body muscle groups and 60 for lower body muscle groups.
Click to expand...

If I understood this correctly it's 2x15, 3x10, and 6x5 reps for upper body following the 15, 10, 5 rep cycles and DOUBLE that for lower body muscle groups. Is that correct? If I'm working thighs is that 30 reps for quads and 30 reps for hams to equal 60 reps? Also, does the 30/60 rep range apply to the 3x a week full body?
 
30 quads and 30 hams=30 per muscle group.
6x5 is too much for most so that will probably drop down to about 20 for most OR you could incorporate myoreps/dropsets to allow more (quality) reps.
 
The amount of volume required is going to scale to the load used as a % of 1 RM. 5 RM loads likely only require 20 reps or so. You could use dropsets/metabolic work to get the volume up as well during 5s if you want to stay closer to 30 per mg for upper/60 per mg for lower. 30 total reps with your 5 RM per musclegroup will likely be too much work for most. That said... I have done 30 per during the 5s without issue, so you could try it out. If it's only for a few weeks, you should be alright. I would prefer to see you do it as clusters rather than sets.
 
What experience level for the 30/upper 60/lower idea are you talking about?

Also maybe I missed it, but it seems to me that the 30/60 rep scheme is more suitable for a A/B routine as opposed to a 3-day full body routine. Correct?
 
AlexAustralia said:
Layne's theory on "metabolic damage" is the most complete pile of garbage I've ever heard. It only applies to wealthy white women who don't/can't track calories accurately, and sadly, is not saving the hundreds of millions of starving kids across Africa, India and China.

But hey ... it's worth getting into a fight with the entire Internet about ...
Click to expand...

Layne successfully completed his transformation from a decent guy into a crazy guru spouting nonsense some time ago. It's sad the way it happens to so many of them. He seemed like a good bro a while back.
 
BPM said:
What experience level for the 30/upper 60/lower idea are you talking about?

Also maybe I missed it, but it seems to me that the 30/60 rep scheme is more suitable for a A/B routine as opposed to a 3-day full body routine. Correct?
Click to expand...

Preferrably an upper/lower split. That way you are doing about the same amount of total work per day. Think about it, upper body has more muscle groups than lower body. Lower you have quads/hams/calves, so you do 60 reps per, that's 180 reps total. Upper you have lats/traps/pecs/delts/bis/tris and if you really must, then upper traps as well. That's 180 reps if you aren't hitting upper traps separately from the rest of the back. So with an upper/lower split done four days a week, you are getting the right amount of volume per muscle group and doing the same amount of total work per day.

I would say it applies to anyone who is intermediate and beyond.
 
Totentanz said:
The amount of volume required is going to scale to the load used as a % of 1 RM. 5 RM loads likely only require 20 reps or so. You could use dropsets/metabolic work to get the volume up as well during 5s if you want to stay closer to 30 per mg for upper/60 per mg for lower. 30 total reps with your 5 RM per musclegroup will likely be too much work for most. That said... I have done 30 per during the 5s without issue, so you could try it out. If it's only for a few weeks, you should be alright. I would prefer to see you do it as clusters rather than sets.
Click to expand...

Ok, that makes sense. I've finished the 15's and had been doing 30 reps for upper and lower MG's. 5 RM loads requiring less reps makes a lot of sense. Just finished my workout of 10 reps tonight (clustered some). Can't wait for the 5's. Thank you so much for the tip!
 
ok so let me just clarify this...when bryan says do 30 reps per MG he's referring to those amount of reps as if it were an upper/lower split not a fullbody routine?

so for example, in an upper/lower split, on upper day 1 you'd hit 30 reps for chest and then 30 on upper day 2, giving you a total of 60 reps on chest for that week.

in a fullbody routine i.e. vanilla hst, 30 reps of chest per day would give you a total of 90 reps in a given week, which seems like way too much.

however, the full body vanilla hst is already set up so that in the 15s you hit 45 reps for chest, 10s- 60 reps per chest, and 45 reps for chest on the 5s. i guess that could be altered so that doing the 15s you just aim towards 20 reps per day in a clustered fashion to reach 60 reps per week.

is there really any benefit to doing an upper lower split as opposed to vanilla hst? everyone says not to eff with it so i dont but maybe i'm missing the boat. i feel like the volume is similar.
 
Great to see Bryan back :cool:

I don’t see much of an issue with reaching his rep goals with full body workouts. He already mentioned the use of drop sets during the 5's so that makes it a lot easier to reach the targets. 2 x 15, 3 x 10, 3-4 x 5 with 1-3 drop sets.

60 reps does seem too much for lower body though. Perhaps Bryan can clarify? Makes much more sense to split it 30 quads/ 30 hams. I know he is using Wernbom's data here and I don’t remember him doubling up the volume recommendation for quads. 30 to 60 reps was just the average range where most growth was seen.
 
It's trivial to collect the needed upper body volume even 3 times weekly. Here's my typical workout yesterday:

Squat: 6 heavy, 10 medium == 16
Incline bench 3+2 heavy, 7 medium, 11 lighter == 23
Leg curls 5 heavy, 6 medium == 11
Pull-downs 6+6 heavy, 10 medium, 15 lighter == 37
Lying rear delts 8+6 medium == 14
Lateral raise 8+8 medium == 16
Front db raise 10+10 medium == 20
Bent over db rows 6 heavy == 6
Shrugs 6+6 heavy == 12
Rack pulls 10 heavy == 10
Shrugs 18 lighter == 18
Sumo deadlift 1 medium == 1
Bicep curls 7+6 heavy == 13
Close grip incline bench 4+3 heavy, 12 lighter == 19
Standing calf raises 15 medium == 15
Hyperextensions 18 medium == 18

So, we have:
Legs: 16 squats + 11 curls + 10 racks + 15 calves + 1 sumo == 52. Ok not really per MG but I'm keeping legs at maintenance for now.
Chest+delts+tris: 12 bench + 19 cgbp == 31
Delts: 31 + 14 rear + 16 lateral + 20 front == 81
Lats+mid/lower traps: 37 pull-downs + 6 bent over row == 43
Upper traps: 30 shrugs + 10 rack pulls + 1 sumo == 31
Bis: 43 rows + 13 curls == 56

I also do many incline pushups at home, which makes up for more metabolic upper body work & ab work.
 
chansen said:
ok so let me just clarify this...when bryan says do 30 reps per MG he's referring to those amount of reps as if it were an upper/lower split not a fullbody routine?
Click to expand...

No. It's irrelevant whether this is referring to fullbody or upper/lower split. He's referring to how much volume you need to do for each muscle group per session. There is a minimum amount of volume needed to achieve growth. All that Wernbom is saying in the paper that Bryan is referring to is that the evidence shows that 30 reps per musclegroup for upper body and 60 reps per muscle group for lower body seems to be the minimum amount of volume needed to achieve growth. An upper/lower split is simply one easier way to implement those volume guidelines.

As you noticed, the example HST routine does already follow these volume recommendations pretty closely for upper body.

60 reps does seem too much for lower body though. Perhaps Bryan can clarify? Makes much more sense to split it 30 quads/ 30 hams. I know he is using Wernbom's data here and I don’t remember him doubling up the volume recommendation for quads. 30 to 60 reps was just the average range where most growth was seen.
Click to expand...

Bryan has already clarified in the article that HST_Rihad linked to. If you read through the Wernbom paper carefully and check all the graphs, etc, it's pretty clear. 60 reps per MG lower body seems to be ideal. This is easy. Two lifts for quads, two for hams, two for calves, 30 reps total per lift. I've done this myself and it definitely was not too much. The legs most assuredly have a high work capacity, after all, they have to.
 
I must be confused or missing something here.



"If your routine gets you stronger consistently, then it's working." This is what I've always been told and, to me, makes the most sense (simply put anyway).

I've been doing roughly 30 total reps per muscle group, per lift session, 3x a week for many months. Of all my MGs, my biggest strength/hypertrophy gains have been my legs. I realize there are numerous variables here, but this rep count seems to be working well.

Now it is being said that 60 reps for lower MGs is the minimum required for growth?


I'm currently on 15s and 2 sets 3x a week is taxing. I can't imagine doubling that rep count for 15s.
 
I don't think it's the minimum, it's the optimal range for the best growth rate. There's some minimum work needed to initiate growth, but it seems to be much smaller. 1 set per MG, anyone? :)
 
We also have to bear in mind that during squats, legpress, deads etc both quads and hams are being hit. IMO: 30 reps of squat= 30 quad and 30 hams. 30 legextensions= 30 quad. 30 legcurls= 30 hams.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top