timing

If I do a set of 10 squats with 140k *which I am soon going to attempt) then rest 90 seconds, I will still be out of breath, and a second set will finish me off quick. If I continue with 90 second rests between exercises and sets, my weights will be a lot lower than if I gave myself 3 minute rests.

Now, you tell me that mechanical load (amount of weight) is the decisive factor, not perceived effort, which is a HIT concept of intensity.

I can do more weight with greater rest periods.

I am now thinking the issue is not the length of the rest period, but maintaining that rest period constant, at least when doing the same amoount of sets and reps.

for example, when doing the 5s, use 3 sets per exercise and 2 minutes between all sets. This alows an accurate measure which one can progressively beat.

But if , for example, during the last week of 5s my rest periods increased, even though weight went up, I am probably not improving much.

I am also thinking that cluster reps could b made much easier by doing more sets with less reps each and ignoring the time factor. Even though the load increases, does that mean there is improvement? For example, 10 sets of 3 with 2 minute rests between each set seems far easier than 3 sets of 10, with a lesser time resting, even though load may be lower.
 
Joe, wait a minute there.

I didn't cite any science.

Now to address your comments.

Yes, test can increase but the rest times haven't shown squat, this is based on science and anecdotes. Many have used such a varied rest time that to say exactly or no more than is horse crap, pure and simple. Second part of this is yes test increases do help but they are not the only reason one will grow or not. The real question is how much of the increase is availble for reception not just how high it is.

The probelm I have with just telling someone what to do is...you are basing this on your experience without understanding or even identifying their capacity. So in essence you could be leading them even more astray.

Now as far as getting yourself condtioned to using 90 secs rest, again this assumes that shorter rest is preferential for hypertrophy and again I'll say that this isn't the case either scientifically or anecdotally as the amount of rest that has been used over the history of body building and in the scientific literature is extremely varied. Is it preferential for increasing the density at which you train, well yes, but that may be totally different than hypertrophy.

So is it right for you, very well could be and that's great but is it right for everyone
rock.gif
 
Agreed, hypertrophy-research.com has almost all of the scientific studies that are relevant to skeletal muscle hypertrophy research. I don't know what kind of degrees/ certification Dan Moore has, but he is way up there in the world of applied hypertrophy training and research. As far as I know Bryan Haycock and Dan are the most knowledgable experts out there when it comes to hypertrophy research AND applying it in the gym.
Before I started my training program, I did an exhaustive study of hypertrophy-research.com and formed my own routine based on all the conclusions science has to offer, it came down to being my own personalized version of Dan's max-stimulation training. All these kind of difficult questions about rest between sets, rep cadence, volume, intensity, workload, etc. etc. etc. can be at least partly answered there.
 
By the way speaking of myself and Bryan, we have re-invented the Thinkmuscle newsletter and like the Phoenix of mythic lore, it shall soon RISE AGAIN, look for it.
 
Good point!

You guys are way better than me at citing or explaining the science aspect.

You are right I guess by saying what I said is not client specific...b/c true...it really isn't. Its more a blanket statement made from my expierence and observations over the past years or so.

That being said...I think there are two variables to consider.

Take myself...for example I have been lifting since 16....seriously lifting since 18.

I think someone like myself would generally understand and make better gains taking advice from  someone like yourself " who is very knowledgeable of the science" that a newbie.

Dont get me wrong beginners need to understand this stuff.

However I think for majority of guys who are new to lifting ( 1 yr or less expierence)

A black and white routine is perfect for them.

Too much early info for someone who doesn't even know these basic yet, can be overwhelming.

My point is I think someone "new"...would most likely benefit from a cookie cutter routine that told you what to do and when to do it.

As this new trainee progress and starts to see action/ results take place the more they will realize the advance stuff later.

For example I am training two guys right now who are doing phenomenal with there muscle gain and weight loss.

I have told them what to eat and what to do...now given one is a newbie and one is not...but if I tried to explain all of the science behind it this early own, and them make decision of what to do after I explained it....I don't think they would do as well.

That's all I am getting at.

Hell when I first came to HST 2 years ago...it was all I could do to follow your speach as well as some of  the other knowledgable guys...now 2 years later...I do a better job....hence the word "better" keeping up.

Do I know my stuff??? I think so...but I have a lot to learn...however I can't site a reference for everything I advocate...maybe I should?
rock.gif
 
mushys,

HST principles indicate that training with sufficient volume and sufficient frequency, with progressively increasing load, will result in hypertrophy. To this end, individual workouts are designed as follows (from another FAQ):

• The number of Reps is determined by the minimum effective load (this changes over time based on Conditioning)
• The number of Sets is determined by the minimum effective volume (this changes over time according to current load and Conditioning.)
• The Rest between sets is determined by the amount of time required to regain sufficient strength to successfully achieve the minimum effective Volume.

So you have a set workout, and the key is getting enough total reps done with the load specified for that workout. Set up a good HST routine and rest enough between sets that you can do the work. There is no magic in being more tired or working faster.

If you do this:
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">for example, when doing the 5s, use 3 sets per exercise and 2 minutes between all sets. This alows an accurate measure which one can progressively beat.</div>
...and it results in this:
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">my weights will be a lot lower than if I gave myself 3 minute rests.</div>
...then if you can't work with the weights prescribed in your HST routine you may have designed a way to accurately measure your lack of progress
tounge.gif
sad.gif


You shouldn't vary your weights according to how rested you are, you should rest enough to lift the weights specified for that workout. The FAQs that I quoted say that, Dan said it at least once (see his post on the first page), and that is the key.

Having said that, if you want to try to work faster to achieve other benefits, such as what Joe mentioned, you can probably do that during the lighter periods. Once you get to the heavier weights, make sure that you get enough rest between sets to do the specified lifts. You don't want to be limited by fatigue, but rather by your strength.

As for measuring progress, there are several ways. One is by taking measurements, to see how much you are growing. Another is to periodically retest your 5, 10, and/or 15 RMs. Finally, if you are able to continue to add weight from one HST cycle to another you are making progress. If you get enough rest between sets during the last day or two of each mini-cycle, you should get an indicator of your progress by whether or not you can keep increasing the weights that you use from cycle to cycle.
 
I'm not really sure why this is an issue. This is HST, not HIT. We depend on load for growth, not fatigue. During the 5s, sometimes I go five minutes between sets, especially with deads or squats. I don't really see how you could do two sets of squats with your 5 RM only 90 seconds apart unless your form is terrible or you aren't using your real 5 RM.
 
<div>
(Joe.Muscle @ Aug. 18 2006,21:23)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">However I think for majority of guys who are new to lifting ( 1 yr or less expierence)

A black and white routine is perfect for them.</div>
I tend to agree, but again, and I'm not picking on you or trying to drag this out more, to understand their goal is what one must consider first before making/designing a plan.

Sometimes blanket statements only confuse more. As an example how frustrated would a newb get if he followed a 90 sec rest while using HST then coming to find out in the 5's he simply couldn't keep up with what he is seeing all the other's guys doing, volume wise. This could lead to an assumption that HST isn't beneficial.
 
This old fart is getting a bit confused here. I thought the research indicated that strength was best gained by using a fast/explosive concentric (lifting) effort and that hypertrophy was best gained by having longer time under tension during the eccentric (lowering) portion of the movement.

That is what I was trying to say previously but several people indicated that the reverse was true.

Have I been wrong all these years or did I just do a lousy job of putting in writing what I was trying to express?

If it is the former, could someone please point me in the direction of the research that supports this as I must have misread something along the road?
 
<div>
(Old and Grey @ Aug. 19 2006,11:24)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">This old fart is getting a bit confused here. I thought the research indicated that strength was best gained by using a fast/explosive concentric (lifting) effort and that hypertrophy was best gained by having longer time under tension during the eccentric (lowering) portion of the movement.

That is what I was trying to say previously but several people indicated that the reverse was true.

Have I been wrong all these years or did I just do a lousy job of putting in writing what I was trying to express?

If it is the former, could someone please point me in the direction of the research that supports this as I must have misread something along the road?</div>I have several studies on this

here

But in a nutshell, fast eccentrics create more damage and this may lead to more increases in CSA than concentrics but at the same time the recovery from fast eccentrics may take longer. So in a frequent workout it may not be all that advantageous.

Fast concentrics increase power and probably a faster shortening velocity attributable to heigtened firing rate(doublets).

My issue with fast eccentrics is the risk of injury therfore I prefer to use a controlled eccentric.

As far as TUT it depends and since we work anisometrically the more important item would be TUT(total).
 
Dan, I keep getting this error message when I try to open the studies:

&quot;Sorry, but this board is currently unavailable. Please try again later.&quot;

Can you briefly summarize for me what the conclusions of the studies are as they relate to concentric and eccentric rep speed.
 
Sorry bout that I forgot I deleted the old forum and some of those may be pointing there. So here are some studies that may be of interest

1: Paddon-Jones D, Keech A, Lonergan A, Abernethy P.
Differential expression of muscle damage in humans following acute fast and
slow velocity eccentric exercise.
J Sci Med Sport. 2005 Sep;8(3):255-63.
PMID: 16248466 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

2: Shepstone TN, Tang JE, Dallaire S, Schuenke MD, Staron RS, Phillips SM.
Short-term high- vs. low-velocity isokinetic lengthening training results in
greater hypertrophy of the elbow flexors in young men.
J Appl Physiol. 2005 May;98(5):1768-76. Epub 2005 Jan 7.
PMID: 15640387 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

3: Farthing JP, Chilibeck PD.
The effect of eccentric training at different velocities on cross-education.
Eur J Appl Physiol. 2003 Aug;89(6):570-7. Epub 2003 May 17.
PMID: 12756570 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

4: Chen TC, Nosaka K.
Effects of number of eccentric muscle actions on first and second bouts of
eccentric exercise of the elbow flexors.
J Sci Med Sport. 2006 May;9(1-2):57-66. Epub 2006 Apr 19.
PMID: 16630746 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]

5: Chapman D, Newton M, Sacco P, Nosaka K.
Greater muscle damage induced by fast versus slow velocity eccentric exercise.
Int J Sports Med. 2006 Aug;27(8):591-8.
PMID: 16874584 [PubMed - in process]

6: Folland JP, Chong J, Copeman EM, Jones DA.
Acute muscle damage as a stimulus for training-induced gains in strength.
Med Sci Sports Exerc. 2001 Jul;33(7):1200-5.
PMID: 11445769 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
 
To address a few statements.

I agree with Dan on the lifting fast part. From what I understand explosive concentic reps are best for growth....but I dont do them for the reason stated....injury!

Tot...I agree/disagree/ or maybe I am just confused or wrong?

But I dont like to wait 5 mins between sets....I use to do it and I just think its to damn time consuming...which points me to this.

I am use to 1 min rest periods...I progess on my weights with 1 min rest periods therefor I think I am covered when it comes to increasing load.

I agree with you that I could lift more under 5 min rest periods....but its not considerable more?...I don't know maybe I am wrong on this?

But I thought as long as variables stay constant 1 min rest or 5 min or just 10 seconds and frequency stays the same...and load progress then...it doesn't matter.

Am I wrong by thinking this?
 
<div>
(Joe.Muscle @ Aug. 19 2006,13:59)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I agree with you that I could lift more under 5 min rest periods....but its not considerable more?...I don't know maybe I am wrong on this?

But I thought as long as variables stay constant 1 min rest or 5 min or just 10 seconds and frequency stays the same...and load progress then...it doesn't matter.

Am I wrong by thinking this?</div>
No you're not wrong in thinking this.

Apparently, IF you choose to use a shorter rest time and use it consistently with a progressive load you will still cause a stimulus.

The issue then becomes how substantially different would the loading be if I increased the time between sets, what would the additional loading accomplish?

Speaking of several mechanisms at once and not directly to one item in particular, it may serve you better you concentrate more on loading than the rest between consecutive sets but in the long run if what you are doing is working for you then.....great. continue on soldier
wink.gif
 
Has anyone any thoughts regarding using a heart rate monitor rather than time to determine rest periods?

I decided upon waiting until 100 beats per minute before attempting another set. This seemed to give a reasonable feel to the workout. Rvrn though the actual figure was faily random (it felt comfortable), the point is it allows me to recreate the same workout over and over with progressive load and keeping other factors constant.

It is very easy to use the monitor.

I would never do a cardio session without it either.

This may be a detail which I am overthinking, but when you have been training a few years and you are keen on results, these little things seem important.

Like squatting to a box to measure depth. I never do squats any other way now. Every squat is almost a carbon copy of all the others. Sheer poetry.

thanks for the input. I'll have a look at some of the sites suggested.

Part of the reward or hard lifting is the fun of researching on the net!
 
I guess what I can learn from this is too things.

For maximum hypertrophy I may be better to go with a longer rest period, b/c I am sure I could use more weight. I will definatly try this b/c I am starting a bulk soon.

For increased heart rate and what I feel is a good workout with some cardio benefits too decrease rest periods.
 
i usually go for two minutes rest in between sets,but when doing a cutting cycle i rest for no more than a minute.along with other things igf-1 levels are increased which promote fat motabolism when using short rest intervals.i wouldnt go much more than 2 minutes as you begin to warm down,wait too long and you can cause injuries when going heavy.
 
Resting 2 to 5 minutes between sets may be theoretically better. I am not convinced of that. However, I like to get my workouts done quickly. I don't want to spend hours in the gym. About 40 minutes is my max. To accomplish that, drop sets work great. If I am giving up some benefit, so be it.  
cool.gif


I also believe that an explosive concentric movement and a controlled eccentric movement are best. Experiments be damned.  
mad.gif
 It just feels like it is making more muuscle.    
wow.gif
( Joe Weider's Principle #2189...&quot;Instinctive Training.&quot;)      
laugh.gif
 
This has all been very interesting. I find that during 15s strength recovery is much faster. Even though a set can leave me feeling absolutely spladged I can get back under the bar and squat again in around a minute. This is obviously because the loads are relatively light compared to my 1RM. Once I am doing heavier loads during 5s I definitely need a lot longer to regain my strength before subsequent sets or my performance is poor. I usually take about three minutes between sets during the second week. Sometimes it might be more when I am doing deads at or near 5RM.

I noticed that Joe said early on in this thread that:
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">&quot;Is it optimal for the most load? -No...but if you are working out for health reasons...this is ideal...which is also a priority of mine.</div>So his goal is not strictly just hypertrophy. I understand this as I do feel my cardio/VO2 fitness has dropped off now that I have taken a break from regular bicycling during my bulking. I intend to get it back as much as possible so will work on it during a cutting cycle or two. However, I don't want to compromise the loads I lift so I will take the rest I need to shift the heavier weight.

I guess one way to reduce overall rest time but to still allow more time between heavy sets of the same exercise would be to 'loosely' superset. So if you do a set of squats, rest a minute, do a set of bench, rest a minute and then go back to squats etc., you would save a whole bunch of time and probably do just as well as if you had a straight two minute rest between each set of squats and bench.

I am sure that it would take some time to adapt to but I am certain that it would allow you to lift heavier loads than a short one minute rest. Of course, it would probably only be practical if you had the run of the gym (or your own gym).

At the end of the day, sometimes I am pushed for time so I have to rest less between sets but if I have time I will use it to ensure I can handle the loads I want to lift.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top