latin_blast
New Member
yes, if your additional objective is to increase strength steadily......
waterburys training
- Thread starter choco
- Start date
I just completed Chad Waterbury's High Frequency Training routine. Basically has you start off with 4 full body workouts/week working up to 8 (4 days, 2 workouts/day). Between different phases of the routine you have "back off" weeks, where volume/frequency is reduced and intensity is increased - basically 1 week where you work up to a 5RM in various excercises and the other back off week has you working up to a 3RM. I gained 11 pounds of bodyweight (195 to 206) and dropped down from 13% bf to 11%bf. My strength also shot up tremendously. For example, on DB incline press, 75x8 was a tough set for me - upon nearing the end of the program, I repped out 95 for 4x6. Just one example.
<div>
(Totentanz @ Mar. 24 2006,12:58)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">If you read around a bit, you'll find that waterbury is pretty much a total retard. He says some really dumb things in other articles and I've seen more than enough that I would completely ignore anything he says.</div>
How is he a total retard? From what ive been able to gather by looking at his recent articles, he seems to advocate stuff very similar to HST in the sense that he's all for frequency - the higher the better as long as you are recovering. He Writes:
"This high frequency training system is based upon the following maxim: the more often you train a muscle – in an intelligent way – the more hypertrophy you'll achieve. "
His background is more for sports training than pure bodybuilding, but he's convinced that the key to maximum hypertrophy is to train a muscle very often but keep the volume per workout to a resonable level. Unlike HIT or DC, he doesn't advocate going to failure all the time either. He also employs rep clustering, training through DOMS, etc.
Where I see some major differences are that he espouses wide movement variety and HST does not.
Like a lot of strength coaches, he uses intensity periodization to manage CNS strain and overtraining but does not really follow HST's SD protocol.
I'd say that the two systems are very compatible. An advanced lifter might pick and choose elements of each and experiment.
Considering that nearly every major training approach out there limits a body part to no more than twice per week, Waterbury and HST with their "more is better " approaches have more in common than anything else I've seen.
Personally I'm happy with my own split routine that employs the core HST principles of progessive loading, high frequency, and SD so I dont follow either approach to the letter. As I've stated here before, I have to credit HST with my "training awakening" and getting rid of my old HIT ways, but at the same time I enjoy reading Waterbury's stuff especially becuase it's interesting to see someone elses' take on why high frequency training works so well.
(Totentanz @ Mar. 24 2006,12:58)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">If you read around a bit, you'll find that waterbury is pretty much a total retard. He says some really dumb things in other articles and I've seen more than enough that I would completely ignore anything he says.</div>
How is he a total retard? From what ive been able to gather by looking at his recent articles, he seems to advocate stuff very similar to HST in the sense that he's all for frequency - the higher the better as long as you are recovering. He Writes:
"This high frequency training system is based upon the following maxim: the more often you train a muscle – in an intelligent way – the more hypertrophy you'll achieve. "
His background is more for sports training than pure bodybuilding, but he's convinced that the key to maximum hypertrophy is to train a muscle very often but keep the volume per workout to a resonable level. Unlike HIT or DC, he doesn't advocate going to failure all the time either. He also employs rep clustering, training through DOMS, etc.
Where I see some major differences are that he espouses wide movement variety and HST does not.
Like a lot of strength coaches, he uses intensity periodization to manage CNS strain and overtraining but does not really follow HST's SD protocol.
I'd say that the two systems are very compatible. An advanced lifter might pick and choose elements of each and experiment.
Considering that nearly every major training approach out there limits a body part to no more than twice per week, Waterbury and HST with their "more is better " approaches have more in common than anything else I've seen.
Personally I'm happy with my own split routine that employs the core HST principles of progessive loading, high frequency, and SD so I dont follow either approach to the letter. As I've stated here before, I have to credit HST with my "training awakening" and getting rid of my old HIT ways, but at the same time I enjoy reading Waterbury's stuff especially becuase it's interesting to see someone elses' take on why high frequency training works so well.
