Rihad's log

Discussion in 'Training Logs' started by HST_Rihad, Jan 19, 2013.

  1. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    You can't do 'negatives' with loads that you can complete 1RM for and call them 'negatives'. Just keep the nomenclature precise, if you can.

    Furthermore, negatives should be heavy. There's no point to doing '2RM negatives' and not doing the concentric portion of the rep as well. Just load it up to 120-140% of 1RM and have at it.
  2. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    All we care about is progressing the load beyond 5RM so that muscle experiences newer tension levels. The requirement that it be heavier than 1RM right from the start seems illogical. One should be aiming at lowering speeds of 2-3 seconds, not some precise load. Please read the FAQ on the topic.

    Of course concentric & eccentric portions may be combined at will, so one may do 1-3 concentric + the rest eccentric. When the load reaches 1RM or beyond, one would just do eccentrics from the start.
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2013
  3. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    Please stop being so obstinate and ridiculous. The FAQ is not a gospel, and it is not the only piece of useful information regarding HST or hypertrophy. Structured load progression is the basis of HST. Doing pseudo-negatives with 2RM, or 3RM etc will accomplish less than doing actual complete repetitions using that load.

    You need to listen to sources beyond Bryan and Borge, your negativity and narrow-minded approach is holding you back :(.
  4. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Obviously one may do 1-3 reps concentric + rest eccentric, like I noted in my previous post. One should probably still be cautious to stop doing the concentric portions well before hitting failure at such loads.

    If you haven't noticed in the other thread, I've been questioning Bryan's advice to work at true 5RM loads (1x5) at the end of cycle, in light of newer research. As the saying in Russian literally goes (I'm not Russian, but we were part of ex-USSR), which I don't know the English equivalent of: hear everyone, listen to some, but do it as you want to.
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2013
  5. Sci

    Sci Well-Known Member

    Totally False. Bro-logic. Show me a study that confirms this. There are none, because it is bull****. Biceps curls strain the biceps as much as anything else, if you load them properly.
  6. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    @Sci - It's just mechanics & Newton at work - at least that's the way I've had it explained to me. Micro-damage is caused by load. Bigger loads cause more micro-damage. The strain being placed upon the biceps is substantially greater for deads, rows, chins, pulls during the eccentric portion of the repetition than during a bicep curl (whether BB or DB). Much as you'll notice that your grip is the weakest element when doing a deadlift or heavy row/chin/pull, compared to a lighter repetition of the same exercise. The notion that 'bigger' muscles bear all the strain during compounds isn't mechanically sound.

    That isn't to say they're useless; I can't think of a better way to deplete them or put them through metabolic paces than with curls (you're not exhausting them before you exhaust bigger muscles if you tried to do it using the compounds). And they're terrific for tendon strength IMO. Hell, traps and lower back will get some conditioning in a novice, or even more advanced trainees doing higher rep work with them.

    I'm not sure what 'load them properly' means. Are you referring to technique, exercise selection, rep total, load used ... ?

    Further, "Bro-logic" ... pretty sure I understand what you're getting at,

    @Rihad - what you're saying is a decent thing to say, but that isn't what you do in practice. Nonsense arguments like 'Please read the FAQ' and quoting blindly from the FAQ as though it constitutes a rational or formed argument indicate that you are not doing that, not even in the slightest. As someone who has trained for just under a decade using HST, and who continues to make gains when I choose to bulk, I can tell you there's a vast difference between using a load that you can complete concentric & eccentric for, vs just eccentric - when doing negatives. Many others on this site have incorporated negatives successfully over the years. Hell, HST as a program should probably re-structured to be 15-10-5-3-Negatives on the main page. I often think the only reason it hasn't been is the pragmatic obstacles that come along with that (spotter necessity, not everyone can take the time to do negatives each workout) and it's better to promote a simple product w/options than a complicated product in its entirety.

    Your borrowed notion that 'one should be aiming for 2-3 seconds' shows how little you understand//have experienced what you're attempting to dictate. Any weight that can be controlled can be lowered in 2-3 seconds. Negatives require you to do the eccentric in that period as the upper limit of load. If you can't resist the weight for that long during the eccentric, it's probably too heavy and dangerous. If you can do longer than that (i.e. your 2-3RM), it's too light. You'll be surprised just how strong you are when you're lowering the load and not attempting to raise it against gravity.
  7. Totentanz

    Totentanz Super Moderator Staff Member

    Bicep curls are also pretty effective at destroying your elbows and forearms when you do them in the 5 RM range or greater.
  8. Sci

    Sci Well-Known Member

    Yes, they can be. But the argument that they don't strain the biceps as much as compounds is ridiculous.
  9. Sci

    Sci Well-Known Member

    At Alex, if you understand what the bicep does, then it's obvious that a curl is the perfect strain for it.
  10. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    But grip strength has nothing to do with deadlifting, forearms don't lift the bar. If you mean that biceps experience more load doing heavy chins than heavy BB curls, then how about when several people attempt to push a car, none of them experiencing more intensity than they otherwise would or could, it's just that their force is being summed up.
  11. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Nothing wrong about that part, I'm not arguing with that! It just shouldn't be presented as the only way to progression after 5RM - quite a huge leap from 5RM to below 1RM, don't you think? I bet you wouldn't normally jump from 85% of 5RM right to 100% when doing regular (concentric) HST reps? Gradual progression a step at a time is much safer.

    Another hasty and a bit aggravated argument. I just noted the speed as the mark by which we could measure if the load isn't too much: doing it too fast means the load is too heavy and pretty much useless, doing it too slow means it ain't heavy enough, just like you said.
    Last edited: Feb 16, 2013
  12. Is this a training log or an argument log?
    Totentanz likes this.
  13. Sci

    Sci Well-Known Member

    Lol, I was thinking the same thing.
  14. Suppose it's somewhat ironic that I potentially just added in another argument... I'll stop now. :cool:
  15. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    It's not a contention I formed of my own thoughts, it's something I've had put to me by a couple of folks whose trade is biomechanics. I found it persuasive, perhaps in part because my own anecdotal experiences and those around me.

    1. Spend a workout with a transition period if you need it, but there is absolutely nothing wrong with large progression steps. For non-pressing exercises, I'd even recommend them. A common progression used to be 80%-80%-90%-90%-100%-100% (for a rep range) instead of 75-80-85-90-95-100. You'll find a few quotes from Bryan that recommend larger progression steps, if you search hard enough//they still exist.

    Negatives are most effect with heavier loads. If you can do the concentric AND eccentric, then just do it.

    2. I'm not aggravated in the slightest. I just don't understand why you are lecturing when you've never done it (2 weeks of negatives). You want to use the heaviest weight you can control for 2-3-4 second lowering. It's pretty straight forward. And if you look hard enough, I'm sure Bryan will talk up negatives in the forums somewhere.

    Just give it a try, if you're eating enough, you won't be disappointed.
  16. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Interesting. I've read through all his posts, but don't seem to remember seeing that progression. Here's what it says in the FAQ:
    With no sign of exact numbers. Some folks try as much as 10% (50-60-70-80-90-100), I picked 5% from my NEW RM of the next cycle.

    How do you know I've never done them?! :confused: I wrote here I've done them in BB curls for 2 weeks straight up to 50 kg. Lately a bit less, as I like continuing heavy 4-5RM (42-45 kg) work for bis. And contrary to some, I'm not lecturing in the slightest, just quoting the FAQ.
    Last edited: Feb 17, 2013
  17. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Looks like after adding one 15's set for inclined bench on top of heavier 5's, DOMS are coming back to me. They are so unusual during 5's. I must be on the right track. Thank you guys :)
  18. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    Did my 5RM workout today.

    Leg press 247 kg (544 lb) x5x3 (was my previous max but in 2 sets with unregulated rest (around 4-5 min.))
    Incline bench 75 kg (165 lb lb) x5x3 (previous max: 80x5,2)
    Leg curls 12 bricks 6,6,5 (previous max: 12x6x2)
    Seated rows 75 kg (165 lb) x5x3 (previous max: 80x5x2)
    Lying 1-arm rear delts 8.5 kg (18 lb) x 12,6 (new exercise, I used to do bent over rear delt raises 10 kg x 5x2)
    BB shrugs 95 kg (209 lb) x 5x3 (previous max: 95x5x2)
    BB curls 42 kg (92 lb) x5,5,4 (previous max: 42x5,4+1c)
    Triceps block extensions 11 bricks x 15 * (previous max: 12x4)
    Calves BW+78 kg (172 lb) x 15x2 (not max per se, previous "max": 74x15x2)
    Incline bench 50 kg (110 lb) x 15, Seated rows 42 kg (92 lb) x 15 **

    As this is my first cycle doing 3 sets with 3 minute rest during 5's, I went a tiny bit conservative with the loads. Never mind, I still have 2 weeks to correct them.

    *: shortened half of full RoM, the half closer to full contraction. For hypertrophy I should probably be doing the other half closer to full extension, if doing partial reps at all.
    **: in an attempt to cause some metabolic pain/burn. Didn't get as much as I wanted to. @AlexAustralia, this probably means it isn't higher training age causing burn not to take place, but rather some kind of acute (short term) adaptation within one training session. Next w/o I'll try lowering the high rep load further and shoot for 20-25 reps.

    Just as a reminder, I'm resting no more than 3 minutes between working sets. Today I decided to alternate exercise sets just as I'm used to doing at non-RM loads. I.e. do one set of leg press, rest a bit, do a set of incline bench, rest, do leg press no more than 3 minutes after the end of its first set etc. First couple of sets went fine, but by the third set I finished bench at RPE close to 10. So I'm not doing this mixing again for heavy leg press + bench and when rest is constrained.

    Overall I'm feeling good. For the remaining 2 weeks, I'll be increasing load further at slowest increments 2-3 kg (4.40-6.60 lb) and shoot for 3x5/3', stopping before hitting failure.
    Last edited: Feb 22, 2013
  19. HST_Rihad

    HST_Rihad Active Member

    First post-5RM workout today:

    Leg press 250 kg (551 lb) x5x3
    Incline bench 77 kg (170 lb) x5,5,3
    Leg curls 12 bricks 6,6,5
    Pull-ups BW+10 kg (22 lb) x5x3
    Lying 1-arm rear delts 10 kg (22 lb) x 5
    BB shrugs 97 kg (214 lb) x 5x3
    BB curls 42 kg (92 lb) x5,5,4+1N
    Triceps block extensions 10 bricks x 10
    Calves BW+84 kg (185 lb) x 12x2
    High reps: Incline bench 50 kg (110 lb) x 15

    A less than ideal workout, most notably triceps extensions, but I almost always feel weaker on Mondays. There must be some functional capacity that gets deconditioned after more than 48 hours or so.
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2013
  20. Jester

    Jester Well-Known Member

    Does your Monday include much physical labor or time at work, prior to your workout ... ?

    There shouldn't be any drop-off; 48hrs is no different to 72 to 96, realistically.

Share This Page