No of Sets

No confusion Bulldog - my concern was probably more to do with the lower rep work, 5's for example. By only hitting 3 reps, stopping short of failure, I think you are really only targeting strength & hypertrophy is the victim. By clustering out the remaining 2 reps, once again I'm not sure how much you are really doing for hypertrophy.

My thinking is in line with what you mentioned about the 1 set approach. By hitting 1 set for maximal weights to acheive the target rep range, this would be optimum IMO. By dropping the weight slightly for the subsequent sets (still in a progressive load manner, ie if last session consisted of 105kg, 102.5kg, 100kg, this session would consist of 107.5kg, 105kg, 102.5kg) this would then take care of the volume aspect without the target reps suffering.

I know for me personally, when approaching personal best lifting, I would be able to do more weight for a single set than I would be able to do for 3 sets, hence my idea of slight reductions to hit the target rep range without having to sacrifice weight on the bar to hit the same weight for all 3 sets. My thinking is that even 1 set at a higher load might be preferable.

In any event, I asked the question about this in terms of HST principals & got my answer, & appreciate your thoughts. You guys certainly know HST better than I do.

Dan
 
<div>
(DanOz @ Jan. 19 2008,19:51)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">No confusion Bulldog - my concern was probably more to do with the lower rep work, 5's for example. By only hitting 3 reps, stopping short of failure, I think you are really only targeting strength &amp; hypertrophy is the victim. By clustering out the remaining 2 reps, once again I'm not sure how much you are really doing for hypertrophy.</div>
This idea in your paragraph here is operating under the assumption that fatigue is necessary for muscle growth, which it is not. I think this is where the confusion is coming in.
 
<div>
(DanOz @ Jan. 19 2008,19:51)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">No confusion Bulldog - my concern was probably more to do with the lower rep work, 5's for example. By only hitting 3 reps, stopping short of failure, I think you are really only targeting strength &amp; hypertrophy is the victim. By clustering out the remaining 2 reps, once again I'm not sure how much you are really doing for hypertrophy.</div>
See, I look at it in the opposite way that you do. I think getting in those extra reps using a lighter weight as you suggest is more targeted at strength than anything else. For Hypertrophy I think you are better off clustering the extra reps with your top work weight if you think they need to be done.
 
NOT to add more confusion where confusion may have gotten straightened out, but I have something to add. For the first time I'm going from 5s to heavier weights (into 3s) after working with my &quot;max&quot; 5s for 2 weeks straight.

I was confused on what to do with the 3s as on all the rest I just increase the sets as the reps go down (1x15, 2x10, 3x5) and thus the volume goes up.

I thought the purpose of going below the 5s, which increases both strength and hypertrophy for me big time, was to take advantage of the opportunity to increase strength (focusing on increasing neurological capability). So to make it easier on me as I'm getting closer to burnout I've DECREASED my no. of sets to &quot;2&quot; as my reps also decreased from 5 to 3.

I'm still getting &quot;some&quot; size results but not near as much as I was on the 5s, which isn't what I thought would happen. It was my understanding that although I may be doing less volume I would still get hypertrophy directly as a result of the &quot;strength&quot; increase. Am I making sense?

I could still be right about that, but I'm STILL not getting the same results as I did with the 5s. So basically I have to INCREASE my sets to &quot;5&quot; as I continue directly into a &quot;max&quot; 3 rep range?

Sorry if I added anymore confusion but I'm really wondering as I haven't seen this addressed on this thread or (as far as I've seen) in any articles.

Now back to my corrected 5th set of 3 rep bend over rows!
laugh.gif
laugh.gif
 
Also, not to add even more and overload anyone here (no pun intended) with complication but I was also doing a few &quot;cheat&quot; reps after my 5s which I've tried to continue into my 3s, again only doing 2 sets of the 3s.

Someone on here once told me doing &quot;cheat reps&quot; on a last set was simply equal to doing another set. If so then why can't we just do that to cut the time our workouts take shorter??

Also, FYI on the subject....I'm not going to failure on the cheats either...I know very well what I'm capable of on that last set and they are just short enough NOT to go to all the way to failure.

OK, now back to my workout (did the rows, don't worry ;)).
 
3's will only have a pronounced effect on size if done in suitable volume to promote that . 3x3's and typical lower numbers of sets will have outstanding and (relatively) quick effects on strength which can then be transfered to heavier loads on the higher rep ranges causing superior growth relative to lighter loads(of the higher rep ranges) of course; or if done progressively (triples)starting at about 80%1RM in sets of 8-10 they can result in wicked growth , sufficient volume HAS to be there for growth - there is no way around it . For a begginer thru intermediate it might be best to taper down from 3x3 to 1x3 (2 w/o's at 3x3 , 2 w/o's @ 2x3 and 2 w/o @ 1x3) when applying triples at the end of 5's in a HST cycle . Be carefull , joint robustness varies on an individual basis and triples aren't nessessarily for every one.
smile.gif
 
O voted for this:
15's = 1 set
10's = 2 sets
5's = 3 sets

I just recently determined my RM's for the 5, 10 and 15.
I'm also coming off from Madcow's 5x5.

I'm going to do 2 weeks of SD before beginning my first cycle.
 
I am new to HST, but am a very excited to begin my first cycle. I am a 35 year veteran lifter, and I have learned, and instruct my students, that the most important part of a weight trainers' body is his mind.  HST certainly incorporates that principle, and is the main reason I am drawn to it.

I do harbor one nagging question, however. As I &quot;understand&quot; it HST seems to violate what I consider to be the most important principle of muscle growth, and that is Progressive Resistance. Let me explain my confusion. If my max load for 15 reps is 100 pounds for a given exercise, and I begin a cycle at a fraction of that weight, working up to a weight that I have already mastered for that rep range, how is performing 15 reps of lower weight consistent with the principle of Progressive Resistance? That seems counterintuitive to me.  Seems to me that my body is not going to recieve much stimulation doing relatively easy lighter reps. I recognize that this is simply a case of me missing something, or something not sinking into my old school head. The advice of knowledgeable and intelligent people, as well as the considerable andecdotal response can't be ignored. Still, the question does trouble me. Thoughts?  Thanks....BrownsMan
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">HST's method of using submaximal weights at the beginning of the cycle is based on the fact that the effectiveness of a given load to stimulate growth is dependant on the condition of the tissue at the time the load is applied. </div>

http://www.hypertrophy-specific.info/cgi-bin....;t=4616

FAQ
 
You do what works for you .
If something ain't working why continue to do it.
Try all the above to see what works for you.
But keep to the fundamentals of HST .

Sonny
 
Many asking questions are still determining growth based on metabolic fatigue, adding cheat reps pushing to failure etc. All these techniques are metabolic and anaerobic conditioning of the muscle, and have less to do with growth than tension, volume and frequency.
 
So... I should read things more carefully.  Just before going to the gym one day I started to wonder about the whole decrease in volume with vanilla HST (after doing 3 or 4 vanilla HST cycles and one cycle with 3 sets per rep range).  I looked around on the forums and eventually found this thread and said &quot;ok cool, increase the sets to keep rep number the same&quot; and went off to work out.  Well, before I'd been doing 2 sets per rep range so I just stared with that, without thinking.  I've done 2 weeks of 15s at 2 sets per exercise.  Do I need to taper the volume  down or just go into 2 sets of 10 and then 3 sets of 5?  I was really only sore the first week.

Edit: I've since thought about this and answered it on my own. I'd delete the post if I could figure out how.
 
Sets & Reps- Original HST vs This thread opinions

Hello everybody and many tks for your posts here. Helped me a lot trying to figure out this Sets / Reps game.

I will start my first HST in 1 week (really newbie). Some questions:

I selected 11 exercises, 6 compound and 5 ISO. Too much...?

Question:

I was thinking on staying on original HST respective to Sets and Reps (2x15, 1x15, 2x10, 1x10, 2x5, 1x5, Negs, etc.), following progressive load around 5% 5RM every workout, some zigzags, etc.

However, after readind this entire thread, I'm in doubts. My thought now is that maybe it will be better to stay at the original in this first HST (experience...), and also considering that I'll be doing 11 exercices... and by the 5´s time, I'll need about 2 hours to finish 3x5 for all 11 exercises... I really would like to stay on around 1 hour x 3 times per week.

But then, if I got it right, folks here are discussing maximization of HST, lets say "adding" the constant volume parameter to the program, by increasing sets/reps to the original concept. And that of course I would also like to benefit ("grain by grain the chicken fills the belly"). Does anybody have an idea about how much we can benefit in doing 3x5 instead of 2x5 and 1x5?

Do you think I should consider reducing exercises so that I may do 3x5's in weeks 5 and 6 (keeping volume), or better keep 2x5 and 1x5 beneficting from the more isolated exercises by other hand?

Sorry if the question is dumn...

Many thanks in advance,
Irongards from Portugal,
Ricardo
 
Before trying to answer I have a couple questions that effect the answer. How long have you already been lifting and are you already lifting heavy weights for your compound exercises. The reason I ask is that if you haven’t been lifting for some time I would do only the compound exercises. Once you’ve done the compound exercises for a cycle or two you will be able to better identify your weak areas and can then add some isolation exercises to help them catch up.

If you have already been lifting for awhile the you might consider spitting your workout. If you can split the 11 exercise into two full body workouts even maybe adding a few more to make each workout full body then you could get down to about 6 exercises per workout and just alternate between them.

I think it is beneficial to keep the volume as high as your body can still recover from. So when you start the 5s you could do 3x5 but once your body can’t recover between workouts or the workouts start taking to long you can cut back to 2x5 and even 1x5.
 
Thanks Grunt11 for reply. Here's a summary of my story:

- Started lifting 5 month ago.
- Progressivly adding iso's to first phase of mostly compunds 3 times per week.
- In the 3rd month started to lift every day (6 per week), pushing weights always when possible.
- Significant gains until 1.5 month ago (11 kg of weigh with fat also increased from 16% to 19%).
- I stucked 1.5 month ago and suppose for some kind of over training. Big mistakes, training 6 times per week, although working 2 body parts each 3 days, with failures a lot of time, elbows started to hurt and repetitions/strengh coming down.
- Decided to stop completely, which was 1 week ago.

When I read depply about this HST concept, it seemed to be a good time to start, taking now around 10 days of stop (SD) and rest before starting it.

I though about your idea of splitting. Does it conflict with the target of hitting every muscle every 48h? or it also works to hit every muscle every 48h although with different exercises, being compound or isolated?

Another question: Would it be fine to go with the split only in the 3x5´s stage?

Tks again
 
Another question: Would it be fine to go with the split only in the 3x5´s stage?
Click to expand...
That’s pretty much what I do, move more toward a traditional split as the weights get heavy.

I though about your idea of splitting. Does it conflict with the target of hitting every muscle every 48h? or it also works to hit every muscle every 48h although with different exercises, being compound or isolated?
Click to expand...
There is no conflict if you are doing a full body workout every 48h. The reason for emphasizing compound movements in full body workouts is that you get more bang for your buck, in other words more muscles worked for fewer exercises. This helps manage fatigue, which leads to overtraining and stagnation, and keeps the workouts shorter because of less sets/reps needed for lots of isolation movements. However, there is no reason you can’t do a full body workout with all isolation exercise it will just take a lot of time.

What are the 11 exercises you plan on doing? If you list them people might be able to make suggestions on how to organized your routine best.
 
Tks Grunt! Here´s my Plan:

Compound - Pull-Ups / Chins-Ups - Rotate each wormout
Compound - Dumbbel Bench Press
Compound - Leg Press / Leg Curls - Rotate each workout
Compound - Dumbbel Shoulder Press
Compound - Weighted Bench Dips
Compound - One Arm Dumbell Row / Seated Over Row - Rotate each workout
Isolated - Butterfly
Isolated - Lateral Raises
Isolated - EZ Bar Curls/Zottman Curls - Rotate each workout
Isolated - Tricep Dumbell Lying

According to my calculations, this workout give me a score (x times different muscles targeted by this program) as follows:

Chest - 3
Tris - 4
Shoulder - 5
Legs - 1
Biceps - 3
Back - 2

I'm 40 years old and play soccer at veterans championship (I train every Tuesdays and Thursdays. Match at Saturdays - So I think Cardio is done in these days).

My week points are chest, arms, neck and traps.

My doubts:
1. Missing Abs
2. Missing Traps
3. Which order of above exercises to follow?

In the meantime, I'm very interested in earing you guys comments at this program, considering all the above.

Tks again
 
Sticking as close to the exercise you listed I would change to this:

Compound - Dumbbell Bench Press / Weighted Bench Dips -Rotate each workout
Compound - Pull-Ups / Chins-Ups - Rotate each workout
Compound - Dumbbell Shoulder Press / Upright Row - Rotate each workout
Compound - One Arm Dumbbell Row / Seated Over Row - Rotate each workout
Compound - Leg Press
Compound - Leg Curls
Isolated - Shrugs
Isolated - Butterfly
Isolated - EZ Bar Curls/Zottman Curls - Rotate each workout
Isolated - Triceps Dumbbell Lying

Don’t have to do the exact order but compound exercises should precede isolation and for most people the exercises should be in the order of the most demanding to the least demanding. However, some people like to put the most demanding at the end like Dead Lifts because they can really wear you out.

I’d ditch the lateral raises and substitute Shrugs if Traps are a weakness but Shoulders aren’t. Also alternating between Shoulder Press and Upright Row (assuming you can do them) will also help hit your traps while also hitting your lateral delts.

Is there a reason you are not including Squats and/or Dead Lifts? The Soccer? If not I would get rid of the Leg Curls and Extensions and do Squats and Dead Lifts by alternating Squats/Dead Lifts/Squats each week so you are only Dead Lifting once a week. IMO unless there is a damm good reason not to, some form of Squat and Dead Lift are a must if you are trying to build mass. There is just no better exercise in the word for mass building than the Dead Lift.

The compound exercises especially if you add Squats and Dead Lifts will work all your core muscles including your abs. Since you didn’t list abs as a weak point then I wouldn’t worry about them if you are doing heavy compound movements.

Also I wouldn’t worry about doing neck work if you are doing enough for your traps.
 
Tks Grunt !

You got it right about Squats and Dead Lifts. It just puts my legs too slaggy when playing soccer... And also I suppose I would be messing with the legs work itself by not letting them rest. That's why I thought something "lighter" could do the job, if I really should be doing legs during the soccer season... Maybe wait to do legs in a second HST cycle after the end of soccer season...?

Another reason is my back... you know that at 40's it is not the same, so I try to avoid the most agressive exercises for the back.

Tks for the Upright Row idea! Solve my problem.

About the order of the exercises, do you think it is respecting the principle of the hard ones first, which I prefer?

Tks
 
if I really should be doing legs during the soccer season... Maybe wait to do legs in a second HST cycle after the end of soccer season...?
Click to expand...
Unless you’re playing goalie I think your legs will get a lot of work playing. I don’t think you would gain to much from doing additional light leg work when lifting. Maybe if once a week when you have a few days break between games you could throw in some heavier leg work.

Another reason is my back... you know that at 40's it is not the same, so I try to avoid the most agressive exercises for the back.
Click to expand...
Obviously you and possibly your doctor, though not necessarily, are the best judge of doing exercises hitting your back. I was also very wary of doing heavy back exercises because of a ruptured lumbar disk and being 50. However, once I started progressing in my Dead Lifts my core muscles got stronger and my sciatica and all back pain went away. Now I can even sit and play video games or watch movies all weekend w/o any discomfort. I just keep the volume manageable and avoid other exercises that stress the lower back except for Squats and Dead Lifts. May not be for everyone but if I had known how well Dead Lifts would cure my lower back pain I would have stopped running and started lifting years ago.

Either the order you listed or the one I did should both work fine. IMO always best to do the heaviest compound exercises first and then isolation. I also prefer to alternate between body parts so that they get a break before being hit again in the same session. Beyond that I don’t think any particular order is necessarily better than another.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top