The Essential Borge Fagerli (Blade)

think it's waste of time
smile.gif


I've done a lot of wave loading in previous years. Waste of time IMO, as far as the 2nd wave goes
Going from a heavier weight to a lighter one is always worthwhile, makes the lighter weight feel much lighter. Which is why I always end up at a heavier weight in my warmup sets than what I'll be using for my workset. But it's just a CNS trick

with the short rests in the Myo-rep sequence, each set onwards will feel a lot harder, so good luck trying to do more weight in the 2nd wave
laugh.gif

And your unlikely to do more than 4 reps on a mini-set unless your lifting extremely light weights and stopping 3-4 reps short off failure
 
<div>
(abanger @ Jul. 28 2009,5:06)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"><div>
(Michel @ Jul. 28 2009,11:13)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I've looked at the links in the first post, but I wouldn't be able to explain how Myo-reps is different than traditional rest-pause training, as they seem to go awfully close to failure even in the first set?
If anyone could explain the difference, I'd be grateful.</div>

<div>
(Borge Fagerli @ Myo-reps - en Evolution and Revolution,Part 1)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Myo-reps and DC / rest-pause?

Those who have read about the rest-pause method, in among other things, the highly efficient DC-program will likely see great similarities with the Myo-reps, but there are some critical differences that you've already seen and will soon see.  One is that we also want to check exhaustion than to use it as a goal in itself to increase the total training volume and frequency, key variables for an optimal training effect.  In part 2 you will be presented a unique way to control the amount of training during the training session so that you can find the right balance between rest and stimulation for optimal effect!</div></div>
The difference to me seems largely a semantical one, where in rest-pause fatigue is a goal in itself but in Myo-reps you're after the occlusion effect, but you achieve both goals in an extremely similar fashion (in M-r you would stop the sets a little earlier, but that's it).

Excluding the progression bit, I think it would be quite valid to sum M-r up as &quot;lift in rest-pause fashion, but stop each set short of failure, so that you can do between 2-4 reps in subsequent sets&quot;.

That doesn't make the system potentially less effective of course, but again, from a practical point of view it is for all intents and purposes rest-pause, unless I'm missing something.
 
My opinion is you are correct. But the one little thing that makes it different for me is that 3 reps seems to be just the perfect number for a balance between maximal stimulation, fatigue management, and efficiency. The efficiency part is what makes it different from max stim. The fatigue management is running as close to the line as possible.
IMO.
The number of reps may be up or down one for others, but 3 is right for me, tapering to 2 if needed.
 
<div>
(quadancer @ Jul. 30 2009,7:26)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">....The fatigue management is running as close to the line as possible.....</div>
Given this, what are peoples thoughts on using Myo-Reps at the start of a cycle, then slowly switching to shorter activation sets and MS style reps, as heavier weights are being used.

If the main purpose of activation sets is 100% fiber activation, but as weights get &quot;heavy enough&quot; we get nearer 100% anyway, doesnt the activation sets become less desirable due to the extra fatigue?

I'm currently trying out MS (man it makes ya sweat!), but I've been considering use of some Myo-Rep work as well, just considering ways of applying it.

My other thought being 2 exercises per bodypart per workout, with one exercise done the MS way, the other done MyoRep way. A kind of best of both worlds approach. Note I'm saying this very little MyoRep experience.
 
&quot;Given this, what are peoples thoughts on using Myo-Reps at the start of a cycle, then slowly switching to shorter activation sets and MS style reps, as heavier weights are being used. &quot;

Shorter activation sets were talked about for heavier weights in the first couple pages of the Myo links. But since you're supposed to be getting stronger as you go, you wouldn't have to lower the work sets unless you wanted to. The small clusters were the first thing I liked compared to MS, because of efficiency and speed. Fagerli mentions that once you get down to 1 rep, you're done, if I recall the article correctly.
Incidentally, misinterpretation of the system was done reading Clutch fitness's article on it, and we all started at 100% of a 10rm:
http://www.clutchfitness.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9363
However.
We're staying with that and adding weight regardless. No one seems to not to be able to do it that way, but the guys I've gotten to try it are all gym vets.
For me to try something like 60% or less would be redundant and ineffective anyway. I'm in the latter half of a strength cycle.

Hey, has anyone else noticed that the rests get shorter and shorter if you're counting breaths? I gotta take in a stopwatch...
biggrin.gif
 
<div>
(trump @ Jul. 31 2009,1:38)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Given this, what are peoples thoughts on using Myo-Reps at the start of a cycle, then slowly switching to shorter activation sets and MS style reps, as heavier weights are being used.</div>
I view MR and MS as two means to acheive the same result. Disregarding any potential metobolic effects from fatigue/occlusion (see fatigue &amp; MPS), if fiber recruitment (and muscle protein synthesis) is a function of the &quot;total&quot; tension applied, you can manage this with either approach. Similar to driving a hummer or lamborghini to reach the same destination.  
smile.gif
 

So yes, from a hypertrophy perspective, I would agree that MS (and sparing fatigue) would be the better choice during the heavier weights to maximize total tension. The advantage for me with MR is that, in addition to saving time, I can potentially experience similar growth without continuing to destroy my aging tendons with heavy weights.
 
<div>
(trump @ Jul. 31 2009,2:38)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Given this, what are peoples thoughts on using Myo-Reps at the start of a cycle, then slowly switching to shorter activation sets and MS style reps, as heavier weights are being used.</div>
Ah, that's exactly my plan for my next cycle. At the moment I am cutting and playing/testing Myo-reps. Been liking it so far, plenty of DOMS even using sub max weights (disclaimer: DOMS is not hypertrophy, but, nevertheless...). So for next cycle I'll start at a low weight using Myo-reps and increase weight every workout, reducing the number of reps in the activation set and subsequent clusters until I am near a 85% of 1RM load. Then I'll switch to Max-Stim and keep increasing the load until I am done.
 
People tend to make things so complicated. Keep it simple and it will work. I think Myo reps is as complicated as it needs to be. Makes a lot of sense if fatigue can be manipulated as a positive instead of eliminated and/or ignored.
 
Quantum, I have been busy at work, and in the gym, so I have not been around here much the last couple of months. Currently cutting as I've packed on some lard during my long winter semi-bulk.

I have been trying out 'double reps' with MyoReps (MR) and I like it. They complement each other - and both saves some gym time.

Trump, as you mentioned, you've been sweating plenty during MS. There is a semi-simple answer for that: MS is more aerobic than doing straight sets, and thus the muscle use a more heat-producing way to generate force in the muscles. The blood are also able to flow more freely (it's not occluded for long), and can thus transfer heat from the muscles. Is this also valid for MyoReps? Occlusion is part of the game, thus work is more anaerobic. However, due to the higher density of the MR sets, heat cannot be transfered in as fast pace as in a traditional way. Sweating becomes intense to keep you cool. When I've been mixing MR with 'double-reps' I sweat big time!

Also due to density, I would belive GH and other stress hormones increases more than normal. Keep in mind that we are managing fatigue in order to complete a specified amount of work in less time than normal, with the aim to maximize metabolic stress for effective stimulation. With MS we are managing fatigue for a whole different cause -  to be able to lift heavier with as little fatigue as possible, which is the opposite of MRs goals.

To mix these up, I would do my MS work first, to induce proper tension stimulus, then do MR work to add metabolic stress (efficient work). This, unlike transitioning from MR to MS in a periodization scheme, will give you a double amount of growth inducing stimluli. To use both in a HST way, I would borrow from Westside and not do periodization on base lifts like Squat, Bench and DLs, but instead do that on supplemental and auxiliary exercises. MS is good for max effort base lifts, so we keep going for PRs using MS (change some parameter every time to keep stimulation novel). Do SD for MS lifts when appropriate. MR is good for supp and aux work.  Also, as MS is good for strength, if we increase the weight on the bar during our set, we end up with a heavy single (perhaps a new PR). The Westside boys usually do 9 sets of 2 (to simulate proper time frame for competition lifts).

Does this make sense? Its not that hard to implement.
 
I really like Electric's idea, and it is simple. Hadn't thot of that. Especially from a strength perspective.
I'm not sure where MR stands for powerlifting. I just had my butt handed back to me after calling Ricky Crain. (he was polite about it tho) It seems that he believes you can get stronger on a BB program, and you can get hypertrophy on a strength program, but you will fall short of your potential if you try to do both at once, in both concepts.
So, me doing dirty ol' bodybuilding work on my PL plan is a no-no. He mentioned his squat/dead 200 page book to answer my questions rather than our phone call.

Still, I can't see how the MR work would hurt anything, because PL's also do speed work, and these are done fast as possible. I can see how they'd actually help make you stronger.
At least they replace cardio.  
wow.gif
 
Strength is muscle+ neural efficiency/skill

you need muscle to get stronger, so this is where Myo-reps come in

I'm moving up on my Myo-rep squats - did 275x9+3+3+2+2  two days ago, up from the 275x7+3+3+2+2  I posted in this thread a few pages back. Quads are much bigger already
cool.gif


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e15Rq1v15Wo&amp;fmt=18

The 9th rep felt much easier than the 7th rep I did last time, and this was after some max stim rackpulls and a few Good Mornings up to 275x2 (sub-maximal). So I could have done a 10th rep to make it feel like last time, with a rep in the tank. Granted my posterior chain is quite a big stronger than my quads, so I expect some really fast squat gains. 275x15 will come faster than expected  
biggrin.gif
 
I totally agree. Westside template calls for hypertrophy AND strength (and speed) work to progress. All three types recruits and loads the muscle fibers by different means. It eventually comes down to what amount of work that stimulates growth.

Do low volume PL type training and get strong (neural and some myofibrillar hypertrophy) - do high volume BB training and get big (mainly sarcoplasmic and some myofibrillar hypertrophy) - or do medium-high volume mixed PL+BB training and get both strong and big. Do an insane lot of work and you might experience muscle hyperplacia too. Probably you burn out...  
wow.gif


What makes some people think muscle cannot get bot big and strong is the muscle's preference for specialization. The muscle adapts to stimuli. Wanna run? Slow muscle fibers get the front seat treatment. Wanna lift? Then it's the faster fibers that gets in the spotlight. But strength and hypertrophy work both utilize the same type of fibers. So what is the problem? Rep ranges? Types of stimuli? No, that has been shown not to be a problem. In fact, doing strength work and then high rep work (same muscle) promotes the best hypertrophy gains, versus keeping close to the same weights. MR may shorten the rep range on subsequent sets, but the weight is still the same. The stimulation effect is nearly the same as BB type work, but MR also helps us preserve energy for recovery (or even more work). Ergo, MR is perfect to combine with heavy work.

Sure, progressing from MR to MS fits the HST model, but is that the way to maximize results? Then what results? Hypertrophy? Perhaps. But both?  
rock.gif


We want both, don't we?  
tounge.gif
 
Well it didn't come from MY mouth - like you, I'd go for both. What Ricky was talking about is the pure goal of strength - and many compete in very low weight classes that make many of us look like noobs, lifting multiples of their bodyweight. He did mention that he's not seen bodybuilders reach their strength potentials...more like he NEVER sees that, so he tried to get me &quot;pure&quot;.
Now I agree that MR's seem like the perfect companion to strength training. I even see some strength training that nearly duplicates them as I've been looking at benchwork:
http://www.wannabebig.com/trainin....30-days
If you read it and scroll down to the workouts, you'll see that on non-ME days, they do 3x3 after a warmup and with little rest. Very similar.
I plan now to cut back on the volume per se, as recommended, but will keep the myoreps in on the odd days. I worked hard for this size and don't want to lose any.

The transition is kind of hard. We're all so used to BBing style workouts, it's a big temptation to overdo things. And I have NO idea yet what I'm going to do in 3 weeks at the end of the deadlift routine. I feel almost like a total noob here in this strange land.
 
Couldn't it be equally or more effective to do drop sets instead of rest-pause?

If the goal is occlusion then one could rest even less between sets with drop sets. Whatever loss there is due to the reduced load might be compensated for by the increased occlusion effect, and one might even be able to do more total sets with less accumulated fatigue by reduction the load. I'm just speculating, but given that the Japanese study showed that a 20% RPM load could stimulate hypertrophy during occlusion, drop sets could/should also be effective.
 
<div>
(CoolColJ @ Jul. 31 2009,9:06)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I'm moving up on my Myo-rep squats - did 275x9+3+3+2+2  two days ago, up from the 275x7+3+3+2+2  I posted in this thread a few pages back. Quads are much bigger already
cool.gif


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e15Rq1v15Wo&amp;fmt=18

The 9th rep felt much easier than the 7th rep I did last time, and this was after some max stim rackpulls and a few Good Mornings up to 275x2 (sub-maximal). So I could have done a 10th rep to make it feel like last time, with a rep in the tank. Granted my posterior chain is quite a big stronger than my quads, so I expect some really fast squat gains. 275x15 will come faster than expected  
biggrin.gif
</div>
did 275x11+3+3+2+2 with a rep in the tank on the activation set
cool.gif


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04TvaFudflw&amp;fmt=18

Myo-reps works as is people!
wow.gif


And I again lost 1lb of fat and gained 1lb of muscle this week. Bodyweight the same, but waist and other measurements down, except my leg and hip ones, they stayed the same
 
yeah it's basicly rest pause- sorta without the fatigue. That's the idea, avoid fatigue to allow more volume once your in the optimal recruitment rate coding zone.
Going to failure will reduce rate coding
 
With Myo-reps it is possible to gain muscle/strength while dropping bodyfat!

I've been doing Max stim rackpulls/clean deadlifts and the rest Myo-repp'ed for 3 months now. I don't train my upper body directly though
And just eating clean, only taking around 100-150g of protein a day. No Protein powder, just a multi-vitamin and fishoil, and real food, mostly meat/eggs and fruits, raw nuts


what I look like after 1 month
May 21st 206lbs
CCJ_Back_206lbs_21May2009.JPG



2+ months later, today - 200lbs, ok the lighting is different but I do look leaner, less rolls around the mid section, and less chubbiness on the chin/cheeks. I'll take better pics next time. So I did manage to get leaner and gain strength/size in my lower body. Rest pause style training works pretty well
CCJ_Back_200lbs_9Aug_2009.JPG


I may have dropped 8-10lbs of fat and gained a few pounds of muscle. My strength is up by a large amount across the board  
ghostface.gif

My leg and hip measurements haven't changed much in the 3 months, but my waist has dropped about 2 inches

Probably the best way to maintain muscle mass when leaning up, especially on bench me thinks. And it does feel like your doing sprint intervals  
biggrin.gif
 
Now I am wondering if I-Bodybuilding routine uses the first all out rep to do the same thing. <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">allow more volume once your in the optimal recruitment rate coding zone.
Going to failure will reduce rate coding</div>

Looks like they use heavy wieght but before they do they do 1 rep with close to max weight to 'ready the cns'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top