Study: 1 set vs 3
- Thread starter Dood
- Start date
Bob, if there were a lot of whiskey bottles in the parking lot, it was Gironda's gym.
Poliquin's GVT program was based on Gironda's X by X schemes (usually 6x6, 8x8 and 10x10.)
"Beginners" would start out on 6x6, which involved using a very light weight (somewhere around the 50% of 1RM range) and very short periods (10-30 seconds.) It's actually not *that* tough. It's a form of density training in the sense that you'd try to shorten the rest periods as you got better at it.
Overall fatigue is more than a 2x15 scheme, but it isn't the torture that the last few sets of GVT usually were. However, the next day, you literally felt like somebody amputated you. The DOMS could be nauseating.
cheers,
Jules
"Beginners" would start out on 6x6, which involved using a very light weight (somewhere around the 50% of 1RM range) and very short periods (10-30 seconds.) It's actually not *that* tough. It's a form of density training in the sense that you'd try to shorten the rest periods as you got better at it.
Overall fatigue is more than a 2x15 scheme, but it isn't the torture that the last few sets of GVT usually were. However, the next day, you literally felt like somebody amputated you. The DOMS could be nauseating.
cheers,
Jules
I
imported_dkm1987
Guest
To quote Sonny and Cher (man I had the hots for her when I was a young lad), "the Beat goes On"[b said:Quote[/b] (Dood @ May 20 2005,9:08)]Touching back on the original topic I've come across these links dealing with the single vs. multiple sets debate. If these are redundant please forgive, but I found them interesting and amusing, especially the first. The author of the first quotes Arthur Jones: "Dr. Berger’s published statements literally force me to assume that the man is an outright idiot”
LOL, the beauty of rational scientific discourse.
http://72.14.207.104/search?....e&hl=en
http://bjsm.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/38/2/240-a
http://bjsm.bmjjournals.com/cgi....0aef3be
Wolfe BL, LeMura LM, Cole PJ.
Quantitative analysis of single- vs. multiple-set programs in resistance training.
J Strength Cond Res. 2004 Feb;18(1):35-47. Review.
Schlumberger A, Stec J, Schmidtbleicher D.
Single- vs. multiple-set strength training in women.
J Strength Cond Res. 2001 Aug;15(3):284-9.
Galvao DA, Taaffe DR.
Single- vs. multiple-set resistance training: recent developments in the controversy.
J Strength Cond Res. 2004 Aug;18(3):660-7. Review.
Kemmler WK, Lauber D, Engelke K, Weineck J.
Effects of single- vs. multiple-set resistance training on maximum strength and body composition in trained postmenopausal women.
J Strength Cond Res. 2004 Nov;18(4):689-94.
Paulsen G, Myklestad D, Raastad T.
The influence of volume of exercise on early adaptations to strength training.
J Strength Cond Res. 2003 Feb;17(1):115-20.
It never ends
"McGuigan and McBride fail to address the unsupported claim in the Position Stand that intermediate and advanced trainees require training programs that are different from beginning programs, and that most of the so-called evidence in the Position Stand was drawn from studies involving novice trainees - not from their targeted demographics (intermediate and advanced trainees). Nor do they justify the ACSM’s selective and improper reporting of data and studies, misinterpretation of studies, omission of evidence that is contrary to their claims, or the citation of references entirely irrelevant to their claims. Not one of these flaws is discussed by McGuigan and McBride. Instead, they attempt to deflect attention from these fundamental problems with the Position Stand and the defective review process at the ACSM."
<a href="http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:SqahIDXSqX0J:www.asep.org/jeponline/issue/Doc/Au...+single-+vs.+multiple-set+programs+in+resista
nce+training.&hl=en" target="_blank">http://64.233.161.104/search?.....&hl=en</a>
I'm still waiting for that definitive study that says 1 set of 1 rep is all you need to get hyooooge
I'm lazy
"McGuigan and McBride fail to address the unsupported claim in the Position Stand that intermediate and advanced trainees require training programs that are different from beginning programs, and that most of the so-called evidence in the Position Stand was drawn from studies involving novice trainees - not from their targeted demographics (intermediate and advanced trainees). Nor do they justify the ACSM’s selective and improper reporting of data and studies, misinterpretation of studies, omission of evidence that is contrary to their claims, or the citation of references entirely irrelevant to their claims. Not one of these flaws is discussed by McGuigan and McBride. Instead, they attempt to deflect attention from these fundamental problems with the Position Stand and the defective review process at the ACSM."
<a href="http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:SqahIDXSqX0J:www.asep.org/jeponline/issue/Doc/Au...+single-+vs.+multiple-set+programs+in+resista
nce+training.&hl=en" target="_blank">http://64.233.161.104/search?.....&hl=en</a>
I'm still waiting for that definitive study that says 1 set of 1 rep is all you need to get hyooooge
I
imported_dkm1987
Guest
For $500 Dollars US I'll find you one[b said:Quote[/b] (Dood @ June 03 2005,5:49)]I'm still waiting for that definitive study that says 1 set of 1 rep is all you need to get hyoooogeI'm lazy
or make it up, whichever you prefer.
I
imported_dkm1987
Guest
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=14971985&query_hl=72[b said:Quote[/b] (Dood @ June 03 2005,5:58)]Aaah, I just realized I didn't actually find the first study you referenced, hence the "rebutal" is not directly relevant.My bad. Still searching...
Bump! This is an interesting thread!
Here is one contribution on how to maximize metabolic stimulation after the mechanic stimulation. It addresses how to get appropriate TUT also:
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Time under tension and blood lactate response during four different resistance training methods.
Gentil P, Oliveira E, Bottaro M.
College of Health Sciences, University of Brasilia, Brazil. paulogentil@hotmail.com
Mechanical stimuli have often been suggested to be the major determinant of resistance training adaptations; however, some studies suggested that metabolic changes also play an important role in the gains of muscle size and strength. Several resistance training methods (RTM) have been employed with the purpose of manipulating mechanical and metabolic stimuli; however, information about their physiological effects are scarce. The objective of this study was to compare the time under tension (TUT) and blood lactate responses among four different RTM reported in the literature. The four RTM were performed in a knee extension machine at 10 repetition maximum (RM) load by 12 recreationally trained young men. The RTM tested were: 10RM, super-slow (SL-subjects performed one 60-second repetition with 30 seconds for eccentric and 30 seconds for concentric phase), functional isometrics (FI-in each repetition, a five-second maximal isometric contraction was executed with the knees fully extended) and adapted vascular occlusion (VO-subjects performed a 20-second maximal isometric contraction with the knees fully extended and immediately proceeded to normal isoinertial lifts). According to the results, all RTM produced significant increases in blood lactate levels. However, blood lactate responses during FI (4.48+/-1.57 mM) and VO (4.23+/-1.66 mM) methods were higher than the SL method (3.41+/-1.14 mM). The TUT for SL (60 s), FI (56.33+/-6.46 s), and VO (53.08+/-4.76 s) methods were higher than TUT for 10RM (42.08+/-3.18 s). Additionally, TUT for the SL method was higher than TUT during the VO method. Therefore, the SL method may not be recommended if one wants to provide a high metabolic stimulus. The FI method appeared to be especially effective in promoting both type of stimuli.
J Physiol Anthropol. 2006 Sep;25(5):339-44.</div>
Here is a recipe for HST practioners, seeking to maximize stimuli and still keeping the volume down (TUT approx. 60+ seconds):
- I figured during 15RMs the FI was more appropriate, since 15RMs is more about metabolic stress.
- During 10RMs I actually have no idea, but you should try to get the most TUT out of the set, by combining FI and regular reps, using a 10RM weight, for the sake of weight progression.
- During 5RMs you do your 5 reps with 5RM, then perform VO and then 15 reps of 50% of 1RM.
- Going beyond 5RMs, focus on upping the weights on the beginning of the set by any means possible (negatives, partials, isometrics, max stim) to achieve maximum mechanic stimuli, and then continue with metabolic stress, again by performing a VO and then finishing off the excercise with 15 reps of 50% of 1RM.
- Thus we are beginning with mostly metabolic stimuli when the weights are light, and moving on towards more mechanic stimuli as the weight increases. Sooner or later the RBE will catch up and stiffen the muscle, preventing mechanic stimuli to be truly effective.
Why 50% of 1RM? The following study should answer why:
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">A single set of low intensity resistance exercise immediately following high intensity resistance exercise stimulates growth hormone secretion in men.
Goto K, Sato K, Takamatsu K.
AIM: The purpose of the present study was to examine the effects of an additional set immediately following high intensity resistance exercise on growth hormone (GH) response. METHODS: Subjects (n=8) performed 4 resistance exercise protocols (bilateral knee extension exercise) on separate days. The protocols were categorized into 2 types of protocol, namely "Strength-up type (S-type)" and "Combination type (Combi-type)". The S-type was resistance exercise which consisted of 5 sets at 90% of 1 repetition maximum (RM) with 3-min rest periods between sets, whereas the Combi-type is a training protocol which adds an additional set (either 50% of 1 RM [C50-type], 70% of 1 RM [C70-type] or 90% of 1 RM [C90-type]) to the S-type. Serum GH concentration and blood lactate concentration were determined pre-exercise and at 0-60 min postexercise. Relative changes in thigh girth and maximal unilateral isometric strength were determined pre-exercise and immediately postexercise. RESULTS: The increasing values of GH concentration (DGH) in the S-type was the lowest of all protocols. On the other hand, DGH in the C50-type showed a significantly (p<0.05) higher increase than in the S-type and C90-type, and a relatively higher increase than in the C70-type. CONCLUSION: These results suggests that a high intensity, low volume training protocol to induce neural adaptation resulted in little GH response, but GH secretion was increased by performing a single set of low intensity resistance exercise at the end of a series of high intensity resistance sets.
J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2003 Jun;43(2):243-9.</div>
However, in the study 5 sets of approx 5RMs (90% of 1RM) were performed. I don´t know if reducing the number of 5RMs sets will distort the outcome. You be the judge.
Taken all together these studies address both mechanical and metabolical stimulation issues.
Best regards,
nkl
Here is one contribution on how to maximize metabolic stimulation after the mechanic stimulation. It addresses how to get appropriate TUT also:
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Time under tension and blood lactate response during four different resistance training methods.
Gentil P, Oliveira E, Bottaro M.
College of Health Sciences, University of Brasilia, Brazil. paulogentil@hotmail.com
Mechanical stimuli have often been suggested to be the major determinant of resistance training adaptations; however, some studies suggested that metabolic changes also play an important role in the gains of muscle size and strength. Several resistance training methods (RTM) have been employed with the purpose of manipulating mechanical and metabolic stimuli; however, information about their physiological effects are scarce. The objective of this study was to compare the time under tension (TUT) and blood lactate responses among four different RTM reported in the literature. The four RTM were performed in a knee extension machine at 10 repetition maximum (RM) load by 12 recreationally trained young men. The RTM tested were: 10RM, super-slow (SL-subjects performed one 60-second repetition with 30 seconds for eccentric and 30 seconds for concentric phase), functional isometrics (FI-in each repetition, a five-second maximal isometric contraction was executed with the knees fully extended) and adapted vascular occlusion (VO-subjects performed a 20-second maximal isometric contraction with the knees fully extended and immediately proceeded to normal isoinertial lifts). According to the results, all RTM produced significant increases in blood lactate levels. However, blood lactate responses during FI (4.48+/-1.57 mM) and VO (4.23+/-1.66 mM) methods were higher than the SL method (3.41+/-1.14 mM). The TUT for SL (60 s), FI (56.33+/-6.46 s), and VO (53.08+/-4.76 s) methods were higher than TUT for 10RM (42.08+/-3.18 s). Additionally, TUT for the SL method was higher than TUT during the VO method. Therefore, the SL method may not be recommended if one wants to provide a high metabolic stimulus. The FI method appeared to be especially effective in promoting both type of stimuli.
J Physiol Anthropol. 2006 Sep;25(5):339-44.</div>
Here is a recipe for HST practioners, seeking to maximize stimuli and still keeping the volume down (TUT approx. 60+ seconds):
- I figured during 15RMs the FI was more appropriate, since 15RMs is more about metabolic stress.
- During 10RMs I actually have no idea, but you should try to get the most TUT out of the set, by combining FI and regular reps, using a 10RM weight, for the sake of weight progression.
- During 5RMs you do your 5 reps with 5RM, then perform VO and then 15 reps of 50% of 1RM.
- Going beyond 5RMs, focus on upping the weights on the beginning of the set by any means possible (negatives, partials, isometrics, max stim) to achieve maximum mechanic stimuli, and then continue with metabolic stress, again by performing a VO and then finishing off the excercise with 15 reps of 50% of 1RM.
- Thus we are beginning with mostly metabolic stimuli when the weights are light, and moving on towards more mechanic stimuli as the weight increases. Sooner or later the RBE will catch up and stiffen the muscle, preventing mechanic stimuli to be truly effective.
Why 50% of 1RM? The following study should answer why:
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">A single set of low intensity resistance exercise immediately following high intensity resistance exercise stimulates growth hormone secretion in men.
Goto K, Sato K, Takamatsu K.
AIM: The purpose of the present study was to examine the effects of an additional set immediately following high intensity resistance exercise on growth hormone (GH) response. METHODS: Subjects (n=8) performed 4 resistance exercise protocols (bilateral knee extension exercise) on separate days. The protocols were categorized into 2 types of protocol, namely "Strength-up type (S-type)" and "Combination type (Combi-type)". The S-type was resistance exercise which consisted of 5 sets at 90% of 1 repetition maximum (RM) with 3-min rest periods between sets, whereas the Combi-type is a training protocol which adds an additional set (either 50% of 1 RM [C50-type], 70% of 1 RM [C70-type] or 90% of 1 RM [C90-type]) to the S-type. Serum GH concentration and blood lactate concentration were determined pre-exercise and at 0-60 min postexercise. Relative changes in thigh girth and maximal unilateral isometric strength were determined pre-exercise and immediately postexercise. RESULTS: The increasing values of GH concentration (DGH) in the S-type was the lowest of all protocols. On the other hand, DGH in the C50-type showed a significantly (p<0.05) higher increase than in the S-type and C90-type, and a relatively higher increase than in the C70-type. CONCLUSION: These results suggests that a high intensity, low volume training protocol to induce neural adaptation resulted in little GH response, but GH secretion was increased by performing a single set of low intensity resistance exercise at the end of a series of high intensity resistance sets.
J Sports Med Phys Fitness. 2003 Jun;43(2):243-9.</div>
However, in the study 5 sets of approx 5RMs (90% of 1RM) were performed. I don´t know if reducing the number of 5RMs sets will distort the outcome. You be the judge.
Taken all together these studies address both mechanical and metabolical stimulation issues.
Best regards,
nkl
QuantumPositron
New Member
One set doesn't sound too bad. After doing 3 sets of squats, 2 sets of good mornings, a set of push presses done PITT-Force style, and 4 sets of biceps curls via Rafeei's dissertation protocol (I know Dan, it was supposed to be 5. Try and it and see if you can get 5!), I am freakin' spent. I was ready to sleep at 7 pm tonight. And yet, I still contemplate the addition of more lifts - rear delts, forearms, neck work - things like that.
Can you get Dianabol at Walgreen's? Forget gains, I just want to stay awake!
Can you get Dianabol at Walgreen's? Forget gains, I just want to stay awake!
QuantumPositron
New Member
BTW. Lab coats. Could maybe perhaps by chance one or all of you write an article or two on these pathway things and explain the various acronyms and what they pertain to. Thanks.
-Wannabe lab coat guy.
-Wannabe lab coat guy.
<div>
(QuantumPositron @ Feb. 21 2008,00:08)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">... and 4 sets of biceps curls via Rafeei's dissertation protocol (I know Dan, it was supposed to be 5. Try and it and see if you can get 5!)...</div>
What is Rafeei's dissertation protocol?
(QuantumPositron @ Feb. 21 2008,00:08)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">... and 4 sets of biceps curls via Rafeei's dissertation protocol (I know Dan, it was supposed to be 5. Try and it and see if you can get 5!)...</div>
What is Rafeei's dissertation protocol?
QuantumPositron
New Member
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">What is Rafeei's dissertation protocol? </div>
Some kind of black voodoo magic. Or perhaps the remains of an ancient alien technology. I am not sure which because in all honesty I don't understand how its possible to pull it off. But it happens.
A female PhD candidate named Rafeei studied the effects of concentric versus eccentric only lifting on neuromuscular adaptations. No biggee there. Except that the average rate of hypertrophy for her subjects was 0.44% per day, whereas studies using 4 sets of 10 saw hypertrophic rates of around 0.13% per day. She wasn't interested in hypertrophy mind you, but she tracked it anyway at several lengths of the thigh with MRI.
The protocol or routine controlled every aspect of the lift, which was a knee extension, including rep cadence, arc of movement, torque, rest time between reps and sets, etc. The loading is 90% of MVCC or Maximum Voluntary Concentric Contraction. This may not necessarily be the same as 90% 1 RM. I posted this question at the Max-Stim forum and no one answered, which is unusual, so I can only presume no one knows. Rep cadence was approximately 2 seconds. Lifting is concentric only. No eccentric. There were 10 reps per set. 5 second rests were done between each rep. 2 minutes of rest were done between sets. 5 sets total. There was no progressive resistance performed. The protocol was done once per day, three days per week for six weeks. Type I CSA increased 12-14%, Type II CSA increased 26-28%. This is not a fluke. Another researcher, who I presume is connected with Rafeei, studied the same thing as she did and used a very similar protocol. He got the same results.
Its sort of like Max Stim, which is part of why I am excited about it and decided to try it for my biceps.
Seated Upright Dumbell Curls:
90% 1 RM
10 reps per set
5 sets total
5 second rest between reps.
2 minute rest between sets.
Rep cadence: 2 seconds to lift, concentric only. I lean over and guide the weights as they fall to the mat and then get them in position for the next rep, which is 5 seconds away. I use a stop watch to time everything. The entire thing takes about 15 minutes to perform. It eats up a lot of time. There is no progressive resistance.
My first time trying this I was pretty sure there was no way I could curl 90% 1 RM so many times. And there were reps where I absolutely cheated, even though I was sitting and pushing my back against the seat. Strangely enough, its possible. Which is why I call it voodoo. The day after my biceps are sore though not in the same manner as usual. And a day after that they are rock hard. Usually I can only get 4 sets. The 5th set is just too much. Perhaps in the coming weeks adaptations may occur that will allow me to get the fifth set. I am trying to stick to Rafeei's protocol as close as I can. And I am taking measurements.
Some kind of black voodoo magic. Or perhaps the remains of an ancient alien technology. I am not sure which because in all honesty I don't understand how its possible to pull it off. But it happens.
A female PhD candidate named Rafeei studied the effects of concentric versus eccentric only lifting on neuromuscular adaptations. No biggee there. Except that the average rate of hypertrophy for her subjects was 0.44% per day, whereas studies using 4 sets of 10 saw hypertrophic rates of around 0.13% per day. She wasn't interested in hypertrophy mind you, but she tracked it anyway at several lengths of the thigh with MRI.
The protocol or routine controlled every aspect of the lift, which was a knee extension, including rep cadence, arc of movement, torque, rest time between reps and sets, etc. The loading is 90% of MVCC or Maximum Voluntary Concentric Contraction. This may not necessarily be the same as 90% 1 RM. I posted this question at the Max-Stim forum and no one answered, which is unusual, so I can only presume no one knows. Rep cadence was approximately 2 seconds. Lifting is concentric only. No eccentric. There were 10 reps per set. 5 second rests were done between each rep. 2 minutes of rest were done between sets. 5 sets total. There was no progressive resistance performed. The protocol was done once per day, three days per week for six weeks. Type I CSA increased 12-14%, Type II CSA increased 26-28%. This is not a fluke. Another researcher, who I presume is connected with Rafeei, studied the same thing as she did and used a very similar protocol. He got the same results.
Its sort of like Max Stim, which is part of why I am excited about it and decided to try it for my biceps.
Seated Upright Dumbell Curls:
90% 1 RM
10 reps per set
5 sets total
5 second rest between reps.
2 minute rest between sets.
Rep cadence: 2 seconds to lift, concentric only. I lean over and guide the weights as they fall to the mat and then get them in position for the next rep, which is 5 seconds away. I use a stop watch to time everything. The entire thing takes about 15 minutes to perform. It eats up a lot of time. There is no progressive resistance.
My first time trying this I was pretty sure there was no way I could curl 90% 1 RM so many times. And there were reps where I absolutely cheated, even though I was sitting and pushing my back against the seat. Strangely enough, its possible. Which is why I call it voodoo. The day after my biceps are sore though not in the same manner as usual. And a day after that they are rock hard. Usually I can only get 4 sets. The 5th set is just too much. Perhaps in the coming weeks adaptations may occur that will allow me to get the fifth set. I am trying to stick to Rafeei's protocol as close as I can. And I am taking measurements.
QuantumPositron
New Member
I happened to stumble over some strength lifting articles that covered isometric training. The terminology differ a little from the article abstract i posted previosly. A good coverage of isometric and other techniques can be found at http://www.t-nation.com/findArticle.do?article=05-089-training. Iso-concentric contrast is equivalent to FI in the article abstract above. Functional isometrics and Iso-concentric contrast are described.
The technique I really thought was interesting was overcoming isometrics (new for me). Pushing or pulling at immovable resistance such as safety pins in a power rack you can get maximum contraction. Pros are you can do this without loading weights. Just adjust pins to get your right angle. Cons are you cannot measure progress other than testing your strenght by lifing other weights. I thought it could come in handy for post 5RMs work to get maximal peak tension in order to get some mechanical stimuli when nothing else can get through (thanks to RBE). Remember that isometrics can cause overtraining quickly, so don´t use to frequently.
Hm, might be of value to check on Rafeei's dissertation protocol also. Sounds really interesting. Thanks for the info, QuantumPositron.
Best regards,
nkl
The technique I really thought was interesting was overcoming isometrics (new for me). Pushing or pulling at immovable resistance such as safety pins in a power rack you can get maximum contraction. Pros are you can do this without loading weights. Just adjust pins to get your right angle. Cons are you cannot measure progress other than testing your strenght by lifing other weights. I thought it could come in handy for post 5RMs work to get maximal peak tension in order to get some mechanical stimuli when nothing else can get through (thanks to RBE). Remember that isometrics can cause overtraining quickly, so don´t use to frequently.
Hm, might be of value to check on Rafeei's dissertation protocol also. Sounds really interesting. Thanks for the info, QuantumPositron.
Best regards,
nkl