Clustering, Myo-rep, Varying Rep Ranges Barbell Plan

[NWlifter]

cool adjustment on the frequency.
I had a thread years ago where I was thinking it might be cool to do
2 weeks of 15's , one set,(1x15) 3x a week full body
2 weeks of 10s, two sets (2x10), but each muscle twice a week (ab, rest ab, weekend)
2 weeks of 5's, three sets (3x5), each muscle three times in two weeks (A, rest, B, rest, A, weekend, B, rest, A, rest, B, weekend)

 

[Clayton]

Nice! Yeah, frequency was an overlooked variable for too long for me. I finally realized I don't have to keep the same frequency all of the time. Interesting on having more time off during the 5s. I might try something similar, depending on recovery. I've never ran a full cycle of having a different number of sets for the different rep ranges.

As I understand his articles, Beardsley argues that recovery should be better in the 5s vs the higher rep training because they cause less metabolic stress. Perhaps that's true on paper, but my body seems to always recover quicker (maybe more joint recovery than muscle tissue, though?) with reps in the 8-12 range (~36-48 hours) and reps in the ~25+ range (~24-36 hours). Another factor I hadn't thought of might be that I tend to do low-rep training with free weights (i.e., back squat or barbell bench) vs. cables/machines (i.e., belt squat or cable chest press) on the higher reps, so maybe that plays a role.

 

[Clayton]

Random ramblings:

If I take off training for a month or more, I start the high reps off at laughingly low weights. If A/B split, I combine into full body and "train" (more like a 15-minute warm-up) every day, but the weights are so low that it takes about 2 weeks before I get close to the normal weight progression. Then, start the normal training split/progression. It works well to do at home, but it wouldn't be something I would bother with if taking the time to drive to a gym. I like it because I avoid any soreness and mentally get back into a routine.

A few other tweaks based on work/family commitments and sleep/diet:

1) If I know I won't be able to train for several days, I'll do a higher frequency beforehand and hit everything every 36 hours. Either combine into full body or stick with A/B and do something like this for a few days:
Full Body:
Day 1: AM
Day 2: PM
Day 3: Off
Day 4: AM
Day 5: PM
Days 6 off, to whenever I can train normally again.

Or, A/B (prefer this):
Day 1: AM: A, PM: B
Day 2: PM: A
Day 3: AM: B, PM: A
Day 4: PM: B
Days 5-, off, to whenever I can train again

I've also done that a few times during the early two weights of a rep block.

2) "DUP it up" either after the 5s or close to the end of the 5s.
I like this as it allows me to extend the training cycle longer and work on increasing my rep maxes for as long as possible (i.e., until I run out of gas or need to take a week off for work/family). I rotate through the different days: medium (~8-12 reps), light (~25 reps), and heavy (~5). These are all close to failure and autoregulated, so the actual reps vary.

Frequency is all over the board on this block. Either increasing the weight slightly or doing slightly more reps from session to session. I enjoy training this style, but each session tends to take longer and over the long term it doesn't seem to make a much of a difference (for me) on increasing strength/size vs. the normal HST progression (as this allows for more frequency and less aches).

3) Adding volume by adding 1-2 normal sets before the myo-reps activation set:
I can't tell if this makes a difference for me. I'm trying to eat at slightly below maintenance, but it might work well in a calorie surplus? At least for me, it doesn't seem to negatively affect recovery, like adding more mini-sets to the myo-reps.

4) Different A/B days
I prefer this as it allows for a longer training cycle and just for the variety aspect. As an example:
A1:
Lat Pull Down
Barbell Bench
Back Squat
Optional: Biceps/Triceps variation

B1:
Triangle-Bar Cable Row
Deficit Deadlift
Cable Rope Upright Row
Optional: Calves

A2:
Triangle-Bar Lat Pull Down
Incline DB Bench
Slant Board Belt Squat (allows for lighter weight and my attachment is more cumbersome to load heavy)
Optional: Biceps/Triceps variation

B2:
Neutral Grip/Shoulder Width Cable Row
Leg Curls
Cable Lateral Raises
Optional: Calves

Ideally, I'd add an A3 and B3, but I run into issues on the rep ranges with some exercises. Which brings me to what I want to try!

5) Full DUP Training Cycle. What I want to try during a slight calorie surplus (hoping for January):
Vary the rep progressions for a whole training cycle based on exercises that work well (or ones I prefer) for those rep ranges. I'm not sure yet on the exact rep progressions, but something like this:
A1/B1 ("medium"): 20/15/10
A2/B2 ("light"): 35/30/25
A3/B3 ("heavy"): 12/8/4

So, if training 6x week, the full cycle would take 9 weeks? And probably about 12+ weeks when I work in 2 days on, 1 day off as needed. For example:
Day 1: A1
Day 2: B1
Day 3: A2
Day 4: B2
Day 5: A3
Day 6: B3
Day 7: Off

Towards the end of the rep blocks:
Day 1: A1
Day 2: B1
Day 3: Off
Day 4: A2
Day 5: B2
Day 6: Off
Day 7: A3
Day 8: B3
Day 9: Off
repeat

 

[NWlifter]

Yes, I don't believe that new fad of recovery being better with heavier. I was thinking the frequency reduction based on the volume (1x15, 2x10, 3x5_)

Ok interesting on the second post, cool info.

 

[Clayton]

Short version: I tend to add the rest days as I get closer and closer to failure.

I plugged part of an HST routine into Claude to give a hypothetical framework on balancing RIR vs. Recovery Needs using a "Current 10 Rep Max of 225lbs and assume strength increases of 1-3%, when averaged over 3 workouts."

Here's what it spit out (I probably need to improve the prompt):

Here's an analysis of recovery needs, reps in reserve (RIR), and estimated new rep maxes for the given workout progression, based on current research:

Workout	Weight	Recovery Time	Reps in Reserve (RIR)	Estimated New 10RM
1	200lbs	24-36 hours	4-5 RIR	226-227lbs
2	205lbs	24-36 hours	3-4 RIR	227-228lbs
3	210lbs	36-48 hours	2-3 RIR	228-229lbs
4	215lbs	36-48 hours	1-2 RIR	229-230lbs
5	220lbs	48-60 hours	0-1 RIR	230-231lbs
6	225lbs	48-72 hours	0-1 RIR	231-232lbs

Research on recovery needs and training intensity:

1. A study by Pareja-Blanco et al. (2017) examined the effects of velocity loss during resistance training on strength gains and muscle growth. They found that training with lower velocity loss (20% vs. 40%) resulted in similar strength gains but required less recovery time between sessions (Pareja-Blanco et al., 2017).
   Reference: Pareja-Blanco, F., Rodríguez-Rosell, D., Sánchez-Medina, L., Sanchis-Moysi, J., Dorado, C., Mora-Custodio, R., ... & González-Badillo, J. J. (2017). Effects of velocity loss during resistance training on athletic performance, strength gains and muscle adaptations. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 27(7), 724-735. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12678
2. Zourdos et al. (2016) investigated the relationship between repetitions in reserve (RIR) and bar velocity. They found that as RIR decreased, bar velocity also decreased, suggesting that training closer to failure requires more recovery time (Zourdos et al., 2016).
   Reference: Zourdos, M. C., Klemp, A., Dolan, C., Quiles, J. M., Schau, K. A., Jo, E., ... & Blanco, R. (2016). Novel resistance training–specific rating of perceived exertion scale measuring repetitions in reserve. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 30(1), 267-275. https://doi.org/10.1519/JSC.0000000000001049
3. A meta-analysis by Grgic et al. (2018) examined the effects of resistance training frequency on muscle hypertrophy. They found that higher training frequencies (2-3 times per week) were associated with greater muscle growth compared to lower frequencies, suggesting that recovery needs may be shorter than previously thought when training volume is equated (Grgic et al., 2018).
   Reference: Grgic, J., Schoenfeld, B. J., Davies, T. B., Lazinica, B., Krieger, J. W., & Pedisic, Z. (2018). Effect of resistance training frequency on gains in muscular strength: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sports Medicine, 48(5), 1207-1220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40279-018-0872-x
4. Carroll et al. (2019) investigated the effects of proximity to failure on strength adaptations. They found that training to failure was not necessary for maximal strength gains, and that leaving 1-3 repetitions in reserve could lead to similar strength improvements with potentially reduced fatigue and recovery needs (Carroll et al., 2019).
   Reference: Carroll, K. M., Bernards, J. R., Bazyler, C. D., Taber, C. B., Stuart, C. A., DeWeese, B. H., ... & Stone, M. H. (2019). Divergent performance outcomes following resistance training using repetition maximums or relative intensity. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 14(1), 46-54. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2018-0045
5. Gonzalez-Badillo et al. (2017) examined the effects of training with different relative loads on strength gains and found that training with moderate loads (70-80% 1RM) led to similar strength improvements as training with heavier loads (>80% 1RM), while potentially requiring less recovery time (Gonzalez-Badillo et al., 2017).
   Reference: González-Badillo, J. J., Yañez-García, J. M., Mora-Custodio, R., & Rodríguez-Rosell, D. (2017). Velocity loss as a variable for monitoring resistance exercise. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 38(03), 217-225. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-120324

Based on these studies, we can conclude that training further from failure (higher RIR) generally requires less recovery time between sessions. As the workouts progress and intensity increases (moving closer to failure), more recovery time is needed. The estimated recovery times and RIR values in the table above reflect this principle.
The new rep max estimates are based on the assumption of a 1-3% strength increase averaged over three workouts, as specified in the question. This progressive increase in strength explains why the final workout (225lbs) is still estimated to have 0-1 RIR, despite being the initial 10RM weight.
It's important to note that individual recovery needs may vary based on factors such as training experience, overall workload, nutrition, and sleep quality. The recovery times provided are general estimates and should be adjusted based on individual response and performance in subsequent training sessions.

 

[NWlifter]

very interesting, sounds very spot on !

 

[Clayton]

4+ week experiment time!​

I'm feeling great, so instead of continuing with what is working, I want to mix it up. We were out of town for Labor Day, so I ended up taking a week off from training.

Even though my weight has been stuck at 205 lbs, I want to bump calories up for the next month or so.

Weights lifted aren't high yet (225lb x 5 for deficit RDL from the floor, etc), but I keep slowly increasing month to month. Basically, a slow, but easy progressive overload. I think I'll be hitting some life-time PRs by this spring or summer.

Based on reading through some of mickc1965's training log (amazing, it's a decade long!):

• Apr 25, 2014

• #49

Cycle Summary

12 March Starting weight was 178lbs - Finish weight is 183.8lbs so increase of 5.8lbs
Caliper Readings
JP3 (7.8%) & JP4 (8.31%) suggests that all increase is lbm with fat the same
JP7 (7.8%) & Parillo (7.44%) suggests lbm is up 6.8lbs and fat down 1lb
DW (10.84%) suggests lbm up 8.8lbs with fat down 3lbs

In saying that I am nowhere near 8% BF and based on DW cannot see how can lose 3lb of fat with a gain of nearly 6lb in total body weight - the overall skinfold measure based on the 10 sites for all equations is a better yardstick but even that reduced from 61mm to 55.5mm.
Based on all the above is it likely that 6 x full body workouts per week can reduce body fat levels in a calorie surplus diet? Lets see what the next cycle brings after SD (only 3 days in and itching to start training already)

(Bold added).

I'm going to run ~5-6x week full body HST progression + DUP rotation.

A few of my rep maxes are complete estimates (haven't done stuff like cable bench press in a while, etc). So, I'll increase the weight slightly or the reps on stuff like that workout to workout. For example, on the high rep days, once I go up in weight, I'll hit ~20 reps for the activation set the first workout, then ~25, then ~30 (estimated as wanting to stay 3+ RIR) before increasing the weight. Also, my cable machine is in 10lb increments per side, and I haven't ordered https://gym-pin.com/collections/gympins yet.

"DUP it up"
Each workout gets the normal 6 weight decreases working back from the 6th workout. So, the first two weeks should be easy going. Assuming 6x frequency, the cycle should last 3 weeks, plus I'm going to continue it until I stop either increasing the weights or reps workout to workout (or run out of gas). Ideally, this is a 6+ week higher calorie blast!

Frequency:
Ideally 6x week, but the plan is a minimum frequency of 4x per week though. I'll be out of town next week for a few days for a kid's tournament, so I'll just use whatever they have at the hotel gym. Those will likely be higher rep days.

I also stumbled across a Reddit comment by Nuckols (regarding RIR):

I think this is a useful meta-analysis to help understand these concepts: https://sportrxiv.org/index.php/server/preprint/view/295/699
Going a bit closer to failure generally leads to a bit more hypertrophy per-set, but that doesn't imply that you need to go super close to failure to achieve hypertrophy. Like, the effect size at 8 reps from failure is about half the size of the effect size a 0 reps from failure. You need to get within a couple reps of failure to maximize the hypertrophy stimulus per set, but you do still get a hypertrophy stimulus with more RIR. You just probably won't grow quite as much if you do the same number of sets (but, you could also just do more sets to get a similar stimulus),
And for strength, there's not much of a relationship at all between proximity to failure and strength. It's worth nothing that that's based on studies that last for (typically) <16 weeks, so I wouldn't necessarily extrapolate that out indefinitely. I do think that if you're not going close enough to failure to achieve hypertrophy, that'll limit your strength development long-term, but it's not a major factor at all in the short-to-medium term.

https://www.reddit.com/r/StrongerByScience/s/BzMncpfVwN

My half-baked understanding and thought process:
1) The first two weeks are easy (or should be easy) training, but it should elicit some slight muscle growth, especially taken in the aggregate.
2) More frequency (nearly daily stimulus) = nearly constant MPS = 'mo gainz and 'mo fun (my brain prefers daily training).
3) Frequency is crazy, but weekly volume isn't. Myo-reps are kind of hard to calculate the exact work set equivalent, but assuming 1 activation set + 3 mini-sets = 3 work sets. That's roughly 18 work sets per week. Subtract for the early part of the training since it has a higher RIR (not anywhere close to failure), so I think it should be manageable for a month, plus however long I progress.

I started this morning:
Day 1: 1 myo-rep set of 20-30 reps + 3 mini sets.
Day 2: 1 cluster/myo activation set of 4-6 rep + 3 mini sets. I will likely do straight sets at some point. This seems to be the most fatiguing for me among the rep ranges when paired with myos.
Day 3: 1 8-12 reps + 3 mini sets.
Repeat.
Days off as needed/schedule dictates.

Brackets indicate grouped exercises for warm-ups with 1 warm-up set on the 2nd exercise after the work set for the first exercise. For example, 2 warm-up sets for lat pull down, then 1 for bench. Then the work set for lat pull down. Then a warm up set for bench. Rest, then work set for bench.

Day 1 (High Rep):​

I use the belt squat cable attachment for everything except for lat/bench here, so it makes for a quick workout. However, I waited 5 minutes before I hit cable RDL after belt squats today. High rep belt squats = cardio.

[Lat Pull Down

Cable Bench]

[Neutral Grip Cable Rows

Belt Squat

Cable RDL

Cable Upright Row]

[Seated Straight Bar OH Triceps

Straight Bar Cable Curls

Donkey Cable Calf Raises]

I really love belt squats. Get full range of motion without any back strain or flexibility tightness.

Day 2 (Low Rep):​

[Single Arm Cable Row (looks like a DB row)

Barbell Bench]

[Angles90 Unilateral Lat Pull Down

Leg Curls]

[DB Shoulder Press

Barbell Squat]

[Tricep Pressdowns

DB Incline Curls

Single leg Cable Calf Raises]

For the calf raises. I have a calf block and use the low row cable paired with the belt squat belt. Kind of tricky to get into, but it works great for constant tension.

Day 3 (Medium Rep):​

[Angles90 Cable Rows

DB Incline Bench]

[Neutral Grip Lat

Triceps Rope OH]

[Slant Board Back Squat

Deficit RDL from Floor]

[Cable Lateral Raises

Unilateral Cable Curls]

Cable Calves]

I really love the Angles90 handles. I get a better grip than normal attachments.

Exercise selection and order are a little wonky/imperfect, but they're largely based on how easy/difficult it is to arrange my equipment without having to move stuff around a ton.

Feel free to give me heck if I don't post an update within 6 weeks! That should be sometime in mid October.

 

[Clayton]

I went down a rabbit hole over the weekend (at in-laws house, so had some time to kill) reading about DUP.
Also this gem by Old and Grey, Jan 30, 2015

Bryan has stated that his sample programs of using 2 week blocks is merely for simplicity and easier for people to comprehend although it may not be ideal. I am not sure which principle of HST DUP supposedly violates:

Frequency
Mechanical Load
Progression
Strategic Deconditioning

If I had to guess, I would guess that some people may think that progression under HST has to be linear with each workout. That is not the case. Linearity applies to within rep ranges and not as to how rep ranges are applied. Taking this to the extreme, one would have to conclude that "zig-zagging" violates the progression principle, which it may, but Bryan considers it as an acceptable variation.

Of course, you can certainly design many programs using DUP that do violate the HST principles in some manner but you can also design programs that use DUP that do not violate HST principles.

In either case, one should experiment and find what works best for themselves no matter what name is arbitrarily assigned to it. Whatever you call it will not help you build more muscle.

But Jester counters, Jan 31, 2015:

mickc1965 said:
But you do if you follow Vanilla HST, in both weeks 3 and 5 you are lifting lighter loads (and for less reps per set) than the loads used to finish weeks 2 and 4, is DUP not just zig zagging more often? the start and the end weights are the same (well at least in my set up they would be) just a different method of getting there.

DUP will invalidate the benefits (or largely invalidate) of SD (assuming you subscribe to the hypothesis).

Training 5's or 8's is going to largely invalidate any work you would do at 12, or 15 etc. in terms of hypertrophy - again, assuming you subscribe to the underlying scientific premise of HST.

Minor zig-zag? Largely irrelevant. Chronic zig-zag ala DUP? Not something HST's hypothesis allows. For all the talk of 'principles', HST is still a specified system.

It is probably worth adding the caveat that the physiology of anyone on chemical assistance or TRT (ala the T-levels of 25 or 30 yr old at 40,50,60,70 yrs old) is not really within the bounds of the discussion. This isn't meant as a shot at O&G, but it is reality.

As O&G said; calling the progrm 'DUP HST' won't make it more effective. People have the need to apply the HST label to their program, which is admirable but misdirected. If the most effective training you perform is not one that could be genuinely categorised as HST, then that's 'OK'.

My uneducated take? I don't know, but varying the rep ranges within the week is fun and variety (and easier on my joints). My setup for cable bench doesn't work well for low reps, but does for high reps, but barbell bench works well for low reps. Same for back squat vs. belt squat.

 

[Clayton]

I plugged the principles into Claude and ChatGPT. Here's are the combined responses (this is mainly for my notes to look back later to see what is working vs. isn't!):

Analysis of Daily Undulating Periodization (DUP) in Relation to Training Principles​

Daily Undulating Periodization (DUP) is a training approach that involves manipulating training variables (such as volume, intensity, and exercise selection) on a daily basis within a week. Let's analyze how DUP aligns with the given principles, highlighting any conflicts:

Principle 1: The body will adapt in a manner specific to the demands placed upon it.​

Compliance: DUP complies with this principle. By varying the demands placed on the body through different training parameters each day, DUP promotes specific adaptations to various stimuli. This specificity aligns well with the principle of specific adaptation to imposed demands (SAID).
My note: the weights are still going up week to week.

Principle 2: The hypertrophic potential of any load is dependent on the condition of the tissue at the time the load is applied.​

Compliance: DUP is consistent with this principle. By alternating between different training stimuli, DUP allows for varied tissue conditions, potentially optimizing hypertrophic responses. This approach can help prevent overtraining and ensure that muscles are in an optimal state for hypertrophy.

My note: workout to workout the weights vary, but the overall load is increasing week to week. So, it should fit the framework?

Principle 3: Once the anabolic load-stress stimulus threshold is reached any additional "work" fails to produce significantly greater anabolic effects.​

Potential Conflict: DUP aligns with this principle but also presents a potential conflict. By varying the training stress daily, DUP can help prevent excessive "junk volume" that surpasses the anabolic threshold. However, DUP often involves high-frequency training, which might lead to surpassing the anabolic threshold frequently. The variation in intensity and volume can mitigate this risk by ensuring that not every session is maximally taxing.

My note: So, basically don't do unnecessary extra sets. However, daily training might fall into this if not sufficiently recovered.

Principle 4: The loading stimulus must be applied with sufficient frequency to create a new and consistent environment.​

Compliance: DUP complies with this principle. It typically involves training muscle groups multiple times per week, ensuring sufficient frequency of stimulus application. This high-frequency nature of DUP supports the creation of a consistent environment for adaptation.

My note: I see the high rep days as "active recovery" (although a little more painful than true active recovery), which allows for a higher frequency.

Principle 5: A given load-stress (or workout) applied in a consistent manner will produce diminishing returns over time.​

Compliance: DUP is fully consistent with this principle. By varying the load-stress daily, it aims to prevent the diminishing returns associated with consistent application of the same stimulus. This directly addresses the plateau effect associated with consistent, unchanging stimuli.

My note: HST weight progression avoids this.

Principle 6: In order for any load-stress to continue to be effective over time the degree or intensity of the load-stress must be progressively increased.​

Compliance: DUP can comply with this principle if implemented correctly. Progressive overload can be incorporated into the DUP framework by gradually increasing the overall training stress over time. This allows for the load-stress to continue being effective over time.

My note: "increasing the overall training stress over time" is better than my phrasing.

Principle 7: The resistance to further hypertrophy brought on by consistent loading of the tissue can be partially reversed by temporarily removing the loading stimulus.​

Potential Conflict: DUP may partially conflict with this principle. While DUP does vary the loading stimulus daily, it typically doesn't include prolonged periods of complete removal of the loading stimulus. This could potentially limit the opportunity for the "rebound" effect described in this principle. DUP does not typically include periods of complete unloading or deloading, which could conflict with the need for temporary unloading to reverse resistance to hypertrophy.

My note: I'll take a week off whenever I run out of gas or schedule dictates.

Summary​

Daily Undulating Periodization generally aligns well with most of the given principles, particularly those related to specificity, frequency, and progressive overload. The main potential conflicts arise with principles related to surpassing the anabolic threshold and the need for temporary unloading to reverse resistance to hypertrophy. However, these conflicts are minor, and DUP can still be an effective training approach when implemented correctly.

Research supports the efficacy of DUP for strength and hypertrophy gains. For instance, a meta-analysis by Grgic et al. (2017) found that DUP produced greater strength gains compared to traditional periodization in both trained and untrained individuals (Effect Size = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.08-0.45).

My note: I wonder if this type of HST-DUP cycle is more geared towards strength adaptions vs. hypertrophy?

References​

1. Grgic, J., Mikulic, P., Podnar, H., & Pedisic, Z. (2017). Effects of linear and daily undulating periodized resistance training programs on measures of muscle hypertrophy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PeerJ, 5, e3695. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.3695
2. Rhea, M. R., Ball, S. D., Phillips, W. T., & Burkett, L. N. (2002). A comparison of linear and daily undulating periodized programs with equated volume and intensity for strength. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 16(2), 250-255. Link
3. Kraemer, W. J., & Fleck, S. J. (2007). Optimizing strength training: Designing nonlinear periodization workouts. Human Kinetics.